IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE M.N.KRISHNAN WEDNESDAY, THE 11TH NOVEMBER 2009 / 20TH KARTHIKA 1931 MACA.No. 1481 of 2009() -------------------------------- OPMV.1312/2005 of MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS TRIBUNAL, MUVATTUPUZHA ............................. APPELLANT(S): CLAIMANT ---------------------- O.K.NARAYANAN, S/O.AYYAPPAN, AGED 53 YEARS, OMPALAMURICKAL HOUSE, HOUSE, ELAMKULAM KARA, KOLENCHERY. BY ADV. MR.K.RAMACHANDRAN MR.S.SREEDEV RESPONDENT(S): --------------- 1. K.S.KANNAN, S/O.SHANMUGHAM, KOTTACKAPARAMBIL HOUSE, KIZHAKKEPRAM KARA, NORTH PARAVUR. 2. NATIONAL INSURANCE CO. LTD., IST FLOOR, MUNICIPAL SHOPPING COMPLEX, MAIN ROAD NORTH PARAVOR, ERNAKULAM. R2 BY ADV. SMT.SARAH SALVY THIS MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS APPEAL HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 11/11/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: SS M.N. KRISHNAN, J ------------------------- M.A.C.A No.1481 OF 2009 ---------------------------------- Dated this the 11th day of November, 2009. J U D G M E N T This is an appeal preferred against the award of the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Muvattupuzha in O.P(M.V)1312/2005. It is the case of the claimant that while he was walking along the road on 26.5.2005, he was hit by a motor bike bearing registration No.KL.7.AE.4064. The Insurance Company disputed the accident. After hearing all, the tribunal was pleased to dismiss the petition and it is against that decision, the claimant has come up in appeal. Heard both sides. The learned Tribunal held that the claimant did not mount the box in support of his contention. The Tribunal was right when it made such an observation and the claimant should have mounted the box and given evidence in order to satisfy the conscience of the court regarding correctness of the accident. The learned counsel for the appellant made available before me for perusal the wound certificate issued by Lisy Hospital, Cochin dated 27.5.2005 at 4.05 pm. At least there is a recital in the wound certificate regarding the involvement of a two wheeler. It is true that the law was set in motion only by filing M.A.C.A No.1481 OF 2009 2 a private complaint which was referred under section 156(3) of the Criminal procedure Code and there after police conducted investigation and filed charge sheet against the rider of the bike. The Tribunal didn't accept it on the ground that since the Insurance Company has raised a plea of collusion, it cannot be relied upon. I am afraid, when a person alleges collusion, there is a burden on him to prove regarding the collusion. A mere recital in the written statement is not a substitute for evidence regarding collusion. So I find that both parties namely the claimant as well as the Insurance Company are equally at fault in not discharging their proper duties. Therefore I feel an opportunity can be given to both sides so that matter can be decided. Therefore award under challenge is set aside. The matter is remanded back to the Tribunal with a direction to permit all concerned to produce both documentary as well as oral evidence in support of their respective contentions and then dispose of the matter in accordance with law. Parties are directed to appear before the Tribunal on 15.12.2009. M.N. KRISHNAN JUDGE. ss