IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE M.N.KRISHNAN MONDAY, THE 1ST MARCH 2010 / 10TH PHALGUNA 1931 MACA.No. 1982 of 2009() --------------------------------- OPMV.825/2003 of MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS TRIBUNAL, PALAKKAD .................... APPELLANT(S): ------------------------ K.P.KANNAN, S/O PAZHANIMALA, AGED 44 YEARS, RESIDING AT ARIAKODE HOUSE, N.S.S. COLLEGE P.O, NEMMARA, CHITTUR TALUK, PALAKKAD DISTRICT. (OWNER OF BAJAJ AUTORICKSHAW BEARING NO.KL 9K 5006) BY ADVS. MR.RAJESH SIVARAMANKUTTY SMT.A.PREMAKUMARI RESPONDENT(S): PETITIONER/RESPONDENT NO.2. ------------------------- 1. VASANTHAKUMARI, W/O CHANDRAN, AGED 36 YEARS, REISING AT ARIAKODE HOUSE, N.S.S.COLLEGE P.O., NEMMARA, CHITTUR TALUK, PALAKKAD DISTRICT. 2. NATIONAL INSURANCE CO. LTD., BRANCH OFFICE, EAST FORT COMPLEX, KUNNATHURMEDU P.O., PALAKKAD, (INSURER OF KL 9K 5006) R1 BY ADVS.MR.S.M.PREM, SMT.K.P.SANTHI, MR.P.K.NIJOY, SMT.NISHA G.THARAMAL. THIS MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS APPEAL HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 01/03/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: tss M.N.KRISHNAN,J. ====================== M.A.C.A No.1982 OF 2009 ====================== Dated this the 1st day of March 2010. JUDGMENT This is an appeal preferred against the award of the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Palakkad in O.P.(MV). No.825/2003. The claimants sustained injuries in a road accident and the Tribunal has awarded compensation of Rs.25,378/- with a direction to the Insurance Company to deposit the amount and recover the amount from the 1st respondent in the claim petition. It is challenging the same the 1st respondent has come up in appeal . 2. Heard. 3. The crux of the matter depends upon the question who was the driver of the auto rickshaw at the relevant time of the accident and who was the owner of the auto rickshaw. The 1st respondent therein entered appearance and contested the case and adduced evidence to show that he was not the driver of the auto rickshaw at the time of M.A.C.A No.1982 OF 2009 2 accident. In support of his contention he had produced the judgment of the Criminal Court whereby he was acquitted and there was a finding by the Magistrate Court that the evidence of PWs. 1 and 2 in the criminal case does not establish that the 1st respondent was the driver of the auto rickshaw at the relevant time of the accident. But the learned Tribunal relied upon the police records which had been analysed by the Criminal Court for the purpose of arriving at a decision. It is true that the finding of the Criminal Court has no binding effect on the Tribunal but it is also a piece of evidence that has to be looked into. It is not done in the case. Therefore, the matter requires reconsideration. The award under challenge is set aside and the matter is remitted back to the Tribunal with a direction to permit the concerned parties to adduce documentary and oral evidence in support of their respective contentions and then dispose of the matter in accordance with law. Since the Insurance Company had paid the amount the junction of the claimant can be dispensed with and the appellant herein M.A.C.A No.1982 OF 2009 3 is directed to take out notice to the Insurance Company for further proceedings in the matter. Parties are directed to appear before the Tribunal on 23.3.2010. M.N.KRISHNAN,JUDGE. mns