IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE C.N.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE C.K.ABDUL REHIM THURSDAY, THE 21ST MAY 2009 / 31ST VAISAKHA 1931 MACA.No. 97 of 2003(C) ---------------------- OPMV.683/1999 of MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS TRIBUNAL, OTTAPALAM .................... APPELLANT(S): APPELLANT/3RD RESPONDENT: --------------------------------------- THE ORIENTAL INSURANCE COMPANY LIMITED, PALAKKAD NOW REPRESENTED BY ITS ASSISTANT MANAGER, REGIONAL OFFICE, METRO PALACE, KOCHI-18. BY ADV. SRI.MATHEWS JACOB, SENIOR ADVOCATE RESPONDENT(S): PETITIONER: -------------------------- AJITH KUMAR. M.R., S/O. RAMAGUPTHAN, SREE NILAYAM, THENKARA, MANNARKKAD, PALAKKAD DISTRICT. ADV. SRI.V.PHILIP MATHEW THIS MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS APPEAL HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 21/05/2009, ALONG WITH MACA 253/2003 THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: C .N. RAMACHANDRAN NAIR & C. K. ABDUL REHIM, JJ. -------------------------------------------- M.A.C.A. No. 97 & 253 OF 2003 -------------------------------------------- Dated this the 21st day of May, 2009 JUDGMENT Ramachandran Nair,J. While the appeal by the claimant is for enhancement of compensation, the appeal by the Insurance Company is for cancellation of the award for the reason that the accident was caused on account of negligence of the claimant. We have heard counsel appearing for both sides. Even though initially FIR was registered against the claimant, later police registered FIR against the driver of the jeep based on private complaint filed by the claimant and reference by the Judicial Magistrate. It is not known as to what happened to the FIR taken against the claimant. In any case, we do not think the finding of the MACT on negligence of the jeep driver warrants interference based on FIR initially registered against the claimant. We do not know why the insurance company did not choose to produce at least certified copy of the FIR allegedly taken against the claimant. Even though the jeep 2 driver was acquitted of the charges levelled against him, we do not think the same will justify our interference with the finding of the MACT that the accident was caused by the driver of the jeep. We therefore dismiss the appeal filed by the insurance company. 2. So far as the appeal by the claimant is concerned, we find that reasonable compensation is awarded under various heads. We therefore decline to interfere with the compensation awarded. Consequently this appeal is also dismissed, more so because initially FIR was taken against the appellant. (C.N.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR) Judge. (C. K. ABDUL REHIM) Judge. kk 3