IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE M.N.KRISHNAN TUESDAY, THE 16TH FEBRUARY 2010 / 27TH MAGHA 1931 MACA.No. 326 of 2009() ------------------------------------ OPMV.1358/2003 of PRL.MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS TRIBUNAL, KOZHIKODE .................... APPELLANT(S): PETITIONER ----------------------- BALAGOPALAN.M., S/O.THAYAMBATTI, MELERIMMAL HOUSE, PALATHU POST, KAKKODI, KOZHIKODE. BY ADVS. MR.P.S.SREEDHARAN PILLAI SMT.C.G.PREETHA RESPONDENT(S): RESPONDENT ------------------------- 1. K.P.KADEEJA, W/O.ABDURAHIMAN, KARIMAYIL HOUSE, ELETTI POST, KODUVALLY VIA., KOZHIKOCDE. 2. K.P.ABDULSALAM, S/O.ABOOBACKER KARATTUPOYIL HOUSE, PUTHUPPADI, ADIVARAM. 3. NEW INDIAN ASSURANCE CO.LTD. BRANCH OFFICE, TRIPURI BLDGS., EAST NADAKKAVU, KOZHIKOCDE. R3 BY ADV.MR.N.S.MOHAMMED USMAN THIS MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS APPEAL HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 16/02/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: ORDER ON IA.NO.679/2009 IN MACA. NO.326/2009 CLOSED 16/02/2010 SD/- M.N.KRISHNAN, JUDGE TRUE COPY P.A. TO JUDGE tss M.N. KRISHNAN, J. ........................................... M.A.C.A.No.326 OF 2009 ............................................. Dated this the 16th day of February, 2010. J U D G M E N T This is an appeal preferred against the award of the Claims Tribunal, Kozhikode in OP(MV)No.1358/2003. The claimant would submit that he sustained injuries while traveling in a bus bearing Reg.No.KED 9171. The insurance company has disputed the involvement of the vehicle. Since the tribunal in its usual style had dismissed the application, the claimant has come up in appeal. 2. It is unfortunate that matters are coming up before this Court from trivial matters where the matter could have been settled or a final adjudication could have been done properly. The persons in charge of the litigation are also not producing proper documents before the tribunal and ultimately every case lands up in the High Court virtually converting the court into trial court. I was also surprised to hear from the submission of the learned counsel for the insurance company that there is no evidence regarding the involvement of the driver and even involvement of the bus. : 2 : M.A.C.A.No.326 OF 2009 The insurance company invariably in all cases conduct private investigation and as a part of the governmental system it is not expected to take out contentions which are totally incorrect. But, there is some justification when they saw materials are not placed before the court. If ultimately it is found that the vehicle is involved in the accident and the insurance company is aware of the same, I direct the tribunal to order cost on the insurance company in this case. Further the mahazer produced in the case would reveal that the bus KED 9171 has been involved in the accident and the body mahazer is available in that regard. Since the insurance company is seriously disputing everything, I feel the matter has to be remitted back to the tribunal to prove the case. 3. In the result, the award under challenge is set aside and the matter is remitted back to the tribunal with a direction to all concerned to produce documentary as well as oral evidence in support of their respective contentions and then dispose of the matter in accordance with law. Parties are directed to appear before the tribunal on : 3 : M.A.C.A.No.326 OF 2009 10.03.2010. Disposed of accordingly. M.N. KRISHNAN, JUDGE cl : 4 : M.A.C.A.No.326 OF 2009