IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE M.N.KRISHNAN TUESDAY, THE 13TH OCTOBER 2009 / 21ST ASWINA 1931 MACA.No. 1349 of 2007() ----------------------------------- OPMV.1823/2001 of MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS TRIBUNAL, IRINJALAKUDA .................... APPELLANT/RESPONDENT NO.4 ---------------------------------------------- SREE MEENAKSHI SERVICE STATION, INDIAN OIL DEALERS, NO.5 TOLGATE SUBRAMANIPURAM, TRICHY. BY ADV. MR.M.V.AMARESAN RESPONDENTS/PETITIONER AND RESPONDENT NO.1 TO 3 & 5 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ 1. SUNIL, S/O.RAMAKRISHNAN, MANJERI HOUSE, RESIDING AT KONOOR DESOM, MURINGOOR- THEKKUM NALUKETTU P.O., MUKUNDAPURAM TALUK, THRISSUR DISTRICT. 2. ASHIK. P.A.,PALAKKAPARAMBIL HOUSE, CHALAKUDY P.O. 3. BALAKRISHNAN, KANNANPILLY HOUSE, KONOOR P.O. 4. MANAGER, ORIENTAL INSURANCE CO.LTD., CHALAKUDY. 5. MUTHUVEL, S/O.SUBBAIYA, MELAVALADY, NORTH STREET, LALGUDU TALUK, TRICHY. R1 BY ADV. MR.P.V.BABY. R4 BY ADV. MR.A.R.GEORGE . THIS MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS APPEAL HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 13/10/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: MACA.No. 1349 of 2007 ORDER ON I.A. NO.1603/2007 IN MACA NO.1349/2007 DISMISSED 13/10/2009. SD/- M.N.KRISHNAN, JUDGE //TRUE COPY// P.A. TO JUDGE rs. M.N.KRISHNAN, J. ........................................... M.A.C.A.NO.1349 OF 2007 ............................................. Dated this the 13th day of October, 2009 J U D G M E N T This is an appeal preferred against the award of the Claims Tribunal, Irinjalakkuda in OP(MV)No.1823/2001. The claimant, a passenger in an auto rickshaw, sustained injuries in a road accident when there was a collision between the auto rickshaw and a tanker lorry. In the claim petition, the claimant attributed negligence only on the auto driver, but the finding of the Tribunal is that the driver of the lorry is negligent and has directed the owner and the driver of the lorry to pay compensation. Therefore, it has to be stated that the court has gone beyond the pleadings to enter into a finding. There may be cases where the court will be finding it difficult to arrive at a precise decision. But even in such contingencies there must be some direction to amend the petition so that the court can consider it on the basis of the pleadings. The claimant through out the petition had attributed negligence only on the auto driver. But as a witness he may change over and attribute : 2 : M.A.C.A.NO.1349 OF 2007 negligence on the lorry driver. But unless it is backed by pleadings, it is not proper to enter into a finding that lorry driver was negligent. Further the owner and driver of the lorry who entered appearance had denied their negligence. Therefore, I think the matter requires a fresh consideration at the hands of the Tribunal and therefore, the award under challenge is set aside and the matter is remitted back to the Tribunal with permission to the claimant to amend the claim petition and permit all the parties to produce documentary as well as oral evidence in support of their respective contentions and then decide the matter in accordance with law. I also direct the Tribunal to frame appropriate issues on the basis of the pleadings available before the court. The parties are directed to appear before the Tribunal on 25.11.2009. Disposed of accordingly. M.N.KRISHNAN, JUDGE cl : 3 : M.A.C.A.NO.1349 OF 2007 : 4 : M.A.C.A.NO.1349 OF 2007