IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE M.N.KRISHNAN WEDNESDAY, THE 10TH DECEMBER 2008 / 19TH AGRAHAYANA 1930 MACA.No. 840 of 2008() ----------------------------------- OPMV.1447/2003 of MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS TRIBUNAL, PERUMBAVOOR .................... APPELLANT(S):CLAIMANT IN THE OP(MV) --------------------------- SABU.M.A., AGED 39 YEARS, S/O.APPUKUTTAN, MAMBRAPARAMBIL HOUSE, KUNNUMPURAM P.O., ALUVA-3. BY ADV. SRI.O.D.SIVADAS RESPONDENT(S): RESPONDENTS -------------------------- 1. P.S.HASSAN PILLAI, 23-5-4, VELLALAR COLONY, WEST NAGARCOIL, DIST. KANNIYAKUMARI, TAMIL NADU. 2. JOSHI.N.I., S/O.IYPE, AGED 38 YEARS, NEDUMGADAN HOUSE, KEEZHUMADU, ALUVA. 3. UNITED INDIA INSURANCE COMPANY, XAVIER BUILDING, II FLOOR, P.W.D. ROAD, P.B.NO.50, NAGARCOIL. ADV. SMT.P.K.SANTHAMMA FOR R3 THIS MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS APPEAL HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 10/12/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: M.N. KRISHNAN, J. = = = = = = = = = = = = = = M.A.C.A. NO. 840 OF 2008 = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = Dated this the 10th day of December, 2008. J U D G M E N T This appeal is preferred against the award of the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Perumbavoor in O.P.(MV)1447/03. It is alleged that the claimant sustained injuries in a road accident. According to him while he was riding in a bicycle a car bearing Reg.No.T.N.74/D/9797 owned by the first respondent came in a rash and negligent manner and hit on the cycle resulting in injuries to him. The 3rd respondent would contend that the accident was not due to the rash and negligent driving of the driver. It also pointed out the delay of three months etc, in filing the case. I had heard the counsel for the appellant as well as the insurance company. Learned counsel for the appellant had made available before me a copy of the wound certificate issued by the Medical Trust Hospital as well as a discharge certificate issued by the same hospital. The accident is alleged to have taken place at 3.45 p.m. on 3.12.02. It is his contention that he was M.A.C.A. 840 OF 2008 -:2:- immediately taken to Karothukuzhy hospital, Aluva and the wound certificate issued by the Medical Trust Hospital would reveal that he was examined by the doctor there at 5.50 p.m. on the very same day and discharged on 6.12.02 in column No.6 of the discharge certificate the cause of accident is shown as road traffic accident at Mangalappuzha Bridge, Aluva. It is also recorded that the claimant was drunken at that time and in the accident he had sustained fracture on the zygoma and other injuries. The Tribunal found that the criminal law was set in motion only by virtue of a private complaint dated 16.6.03 and therefore it had suspicion about the genuineness of the case. The documents relied on were not sufficient for the Tribunal to arrive at a decision regarding the genuineness of the claimant's case. I find that the car involved in the accident is owned by a person at west Nagercoil and a mere suspicion in the mind of a Court cannot be a substitute for fraud or collusion but at the same time it is equally important that the conscience of the Court is to be satisfied with respect to the genuineness of the claim. One cannot rule out the possibility of an accident and if documents relating to his first admission in a private hospital M.A.C.A. 840 OF 2008 -:3:- where he was taken is also available it will throw better light and the result of the criminal case may also have some bearing though it is not binding on the Tribunal and if these types of particulars can be supplied the Tribunal will be able to analyse the matter in better manner to arrive at a correct decision and therefore I am inclined to grant an opportunity to the claimant to establish the case. I make it very clear I am not making any observation regarding the genuineness or falsity of the case but it all depends upon the materials available before the Court that has to be taken into consideration. Therefore the award under challenge is set aside and the matter is remitted back to the Tribunal with a direction to permit all concerned to produce documentary as well as oral evidence in support of their respective contentions and the matter be disposed of in accordance with law after hearing all concerned. Parties are directed to appear before the Tribunal on 12.1.09. The MACA is disposed of accordingly. M.N. KRISHNAN, JUDGE. ul/-