IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE M.N.KRISHNAN MONDAY, THE 16TH NOVEMBER 2009 / 25TH KARTHIKA 1931 MACA.No. 1505 of 2009(C) ----------------------- OPMV.162/2006 of MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS TRIBUNAL, OTTAPALAM .................... APPELLANT(S): PETITIONER ------------------------ SURESH @ SURESH KUMAR, AGED 29, NARAYANAN, OODAMMAKIL VEEDU, CHAZHIYATTIRI, PALLIPALAM, PALAKKAD DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.G.SREEKUMAR (CHELUR) SMT.PREETHY KARUNAKARAN RESPONDENT(S): RESPONDENTS -------------------------- 1. YOUSUF,S/O. ABOOBACKER, MULLATH HOUSE, PERUMBILAVU, THRISSUR – 680519. 2. THE NEW INIDA ASSURANCE COMPANY, KOLLALLUR BUILDING, PALACE ROAD, THRISSUR. THIS MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS APPEAL HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 16/11/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: M.N. KRISHNAN, J. = = = = = = = = = = = = = = M.A.C.A. NO. 1505 OF 2009 = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = Dated this the 16th day of November, 2009. J U D G M E N T This appeal is preferred against the award of the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Ottapalam in O.P.(MV)162/06. The claimant before the Court is one Sureshkumar and the Tribunal has awarded him a compensation of Rs.4,000/-. Since only one of the owner, driver and the insurance company has been impleaded in a case of composite negligence, the Tribunal only granted 50% of the amount. From the very same common award another appeal was preferred as MACA 1490/09. There I had taken the view that being several tortfeasors these persons alone cannot be made liable to make the payment. In the light of my decision in that case, I have to follow the same view. Therefore the appeal is dismissed. M.N. KRISHNAN, JUDGE. ul/-