IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE A.K.BASHEER & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.Q.BARKATH ALI THURSDAY, THE 2ND SEPTEMBER 2010 / 11TH BHADRA 1932 MACA.No. 1106 of 2005() ----------------------- OPMV.851/2001 of MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS TRIBUNAL, MUVATTUPUZHA .................... APPELLANT/PETITIONER. --------------------- RAJASHREE, W/O.RAJVEEV, POVOTHIL HOUSE, THAMARAMKULANGARA, THRIPUNITHURA P O, NOW RESIDING AT NANDANAM HOUSE, PIDAVOOR KARA, VARAPPETTY VILLAGE. BY ADV. SRI.PEEYUS A.KOTTAM RESPONDENTS: RESPONDENTS. ------------------------- 1. RAJEEV, S/O.SREENIVASAN NAMBEESAN, VAISAKH, CHEVAYOOR P.O. KOZHIKODE. 2. HARI.S. S/O.SASISEKHARAN KARTHA, VALLAKKATTU HOUSE, N.F.GATE, TRIPUNITHURA. 3. THE MANAGER, UNITED INDIA INSURANCE CO.LTD., DIVISIONAL OFFICE NO.3. JOS TRUST BUIDLING CHITTOOR ROAD, KOCHI 35. ADV. SRI.M.A.GEORGE FOR R3 THIS MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS APPEAL HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 02/09/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: A.K. Basheer & P.Q. Barkath Ali, JJ. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - M.A.C.A. No. 1106 of 2005-D - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Dated this the 2nd day of September, 2010 Judgment Basheer, J: Appellant who sustained certain injuries in a road traffic accident filed a petition for compensation before the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal under Section 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act. Her case was that she was thrown off the two wheeler while travelling as a pillion, due to the rash and negligent driving of respondent No.1. 2. Admittedly the vehicle was insured with respondent No.3 at the time of the accident. The Insurance Company did not deny occurrence of the accident. In fact it came on record that Police had charge sheeted respondent No.1 for rash and negligent driving. However the Tribunal came to the conclusion that the accident occurred because of the negligence of the claimant herself, inasmuch as she failed to hold on to the grip available on the vehicle properly. But surprisingly nobody did have such a case. We do no propose to make any further comment or observation on the above finding. Suffice it to say that the above finding is ex facie unsustainable, especially on the face of the final report filed by the Police in the crime registered against MACA.1106/2005. : 2 : respondent No.1 (Ext.A3). In fact respondent No.1 the rider, did not have a case that the claimant was not holding on to the grip available on the vehicle at the time of the accident. His case was that the vehicle overturned when he suddenly applied brake to avert collision with a vehicle coming from the opposite direction. Anyhow, in the facts and circumstances of the case we are satisfied that the finding entered by the Tribunal in this regard cannot be sustained. We set aside the above finding. 3. But necessarily the case has to be remitted to the Tribunal since quantum of compensation has not been computed. This has to be done by the Tribunal after hearing the appellant and the respondents. It will be open to the parties to adduce further evidence, if so advised. 4. The Tribunal shall dispose of the case as expeditiously as possible, at any rate within three months from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment. The parties shall appear before the Tribunal on September 27, 2010. A.K. Basheer Judge. P.Q. Barkath Ali Judge. an.