IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE M.N.KRISHNAN WEDNESDAY, THE 9TH JULY 2008 / 18TH ASHADHA 1930 MACA.No. 750 of 2005() -------------------------------- OPMV.249/2001 of MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS TRIBUNAL, MUVATTUPUZHA .................... APPELLANT/PETITIONER. -------------------------------------- PURUSHOTHAMAN, S/O.SIVARAMAN, AGED 44 YEARS, DEVAMANDIRAM, MEKKADAMBU, VAIKOM, MUVATTUPPUZHA. BY ADV. SRI.M.V.PAULOSE RESPONDENTS/ RESPONDENTS. ---------------------------------------------- 1. C.K.SHAJI, S/O.KURUVILA, CHUNDAYIL HOUSE MEKKADAMBU P.O. VALAKAM VILLAGE, MUVATTUPPPUZHA. 2. THOMAS, S/O.PATHROSE, KOCHERI HOSUE, CHELAD KARA, KOTHAMANGALAM P.O. 3. THE BRANCH MANAGER, THE NATIONAL INSURANCE CO.LTD., ALUVA. BY ADV. SRI.MATHEWS JACOB (SR.) - R3 SRI.P.JACOB MATHEW - R3 THIS MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS APPEAL HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 09/07/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: M.N.KRISHNAN, J ===================== MACA No.750 OF 2005 ===================== Dated this the 9th day of July 2008 JUDGMENT This appeal is preferred against the award of the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Muvattupuzha in O.P.(MV)No.249 of 2001. The claimant, a police constable by profession, sustained injuries in a bike accident. It is his case that while he was riding his motor cycle, a car bearing Regn.No.KL-7U-6353 driven by the 2nd respondent hit against his vehicle which resulted in injuries to him and he was treated in the Medical Mission Hospital, Kolencherry. The insurance company has filed a written statement admitting the fact that the car was insured by them. They had denied the allegation regarding the negligence of the 2nd respondent and had contended that the claimant has sustained injuries in an altogether different circumstance. In the Tribunal, Pws 1 and 2 were examined and Exts.A1 to A14 were marked. The Tribunal on analysis of the materials dismissed the application. It is against that decision the present appeal is filed. 2. Learned counsel for the appellant submitted that the materials available are only one sided and the finding of the Tribunal requires MACA 750/2005 -:2:- interference. It is true that the claimant is a police constable. It is equally true that the offending vehicle was taken custody of only after 15 days. It is also stated that immediately after the accident, the claimant was taken to the hospital in the said car along with PW2 and it was the driver of the offending car, who has taken him to the hospital. Immediately on arrival materials are furnished for preparing the wound certificate. Unfortunately the number of the offending vehicle or the ownership of the vehicle is not mentioned in the wound certificate. On the next day of the accident, the first information statement was given, a copy of which is marked as Ext.A2. There is no mention in Ext.A2 as regards the registration number of the vehicle. The police, after due investigation, had filed a charge sheet against the 2nd respondent and the case was proceeded with. 3. Now the contention of the insurance company is that when the person was taken in the very same car to the hospital, it was natural that they would have noted the number of the vehicle and the non-mention of the number of the vehicle creates suspicion. It is also contended that the vehicle was produced after 15 days from the date of accident and there was no damages caused to it. 4. I had perused the documents as well as the evidence of Pws 1 and 2. PW1, the claimant has clearly deposed before court how the accident MACA 750/2005 -:3:- had taken place and how he was taken to the hospital. According to him, he does not know about the owner and driver of the vehicle and only later it came to his knowledge that they are all residing within the radius of 4 or 5 kilo meters from his house. One cannot expect a person to know everybody in the locality and therefore it may not be possible for the court to jump into the conclusion that the non-mention of the name of the driver at the time of the accident is fatal to the case. PW2 is a person, who according to him was coming behind the vehicle driven by the claimant and it was at that time the car came in a high speed, overtook and hit on the vehicle. It has also to be stated that the investigating agency normally proceeds in the right direction and it was only after due investigation a charge sheet is filed. There may be reasons for raising doubts and suspicions, but it shall not be a substitute for evidence. When the evidence of Pws 1 and 2 coupled with the charge sheet filed by the police lends support to the case of claimant merely on some conjectures and surmises, a claim cannot be thrown out. Therefore I find that the analysis of the Tribunal is not correct especially the insurance company has never raised a contention that the claimant has colluded with the 2nd respondent to get the amount from the insurance company. Learned counsel for the insurance company had brought to my notice the averment in paragraph 6 of the written statement. It is a general statement written to MACA 750/2005 -:4:- seek permission under Section 170 of the Motor Vehicles Act. In these type of cases, it must be specifically pleaded. 5. Therefore the finding of the Tribunal requires interference and it is set aside. The evidence of Pws 1 and 2 makes it clear that the accident had taken place on account of the negligence 2nd respondent and I find that the accident had taken place on account of the negligence of the 2nd respondent, viz., the driver of the maruti car. Since the Tribunal has not considered the medical documents and bills, etc. for fixation of compensation, the matter has to go back to the Tribunal. Therefore, the appeal is disposed of and the award of the Tribunal is set aside and it is found that the accident had taken place as alleged by the claimant and the 2nd respondent was negligent. So far as the quantum of compensation is concerned, the Tribunal shall decide the matter in accordance with law after permitting the parties to adduce evidence. Parties are directed to appear before the Tribunal on 22.8.2008. M.N.KRISHNAN, JUDGE Cdp/-