IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE A.K.BASHEER & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.Q.BARKATH ALI WEDNESDAY, THE 6TH APRIL 2011 / 16TH CHAITHRA 1933 MACA.No. 1600 of 2008() ----------------------- OPMV.2518/1999 of MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS TRIBUNAL, KOZHIKODE .................... APPELLANT(S): PETITIONER; ------------------------- K.SUDHAKARAN, AGED 48 YEARS, S/O.KOPPUNNI, KAPPADACHALIL HOUSE, AUGASTHIYA MOOZHI, MUKKOM POST, KOZHIKODE. BY ADV. SRI.JACOB ABRAHAM RESPONDENT(S): RESPONDENTS: --------------------------- 1. A.SADANANDAN, S/O.KUNHIKANDAN, ASHARIKANDIYIL HOUSE, CHELAVOOR POST, KOZHIKODE. 2. THE BRANCH MANAGER, NEW INDIA ASSURANCE CO. LTD., DIVISIONAL OFFICE, CHEROOTY ROAD, KOZHIKODE. 3. "KERALA STATE ROADS TRANSPORT CORPORATION, REPRESENTED BY ITS CHAIRMAN, TRIVANDRUM" IS IMPLEADED AS SUPPLEMENTAL 3RD RESPONDENT VIDE ORDER DATED 1.2.2011 IN IA 148/11. ADV. SRI.M.JACOB MURICKAN FOR R2 SRI.V.V.NANDAGOPAL NAMBIAR,SC, KSRTC FOR R3 THIS MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS APPEAL HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 06/04/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: A.K.BASHEER & P.Q.BARKATH ALI, JJ. * * * * * * * * * * * * * M.A.C.A.No.1600 of 2008 ---------------------------------------- Dated this the 6th day of April 2011 J U D G M E N T P.Q.BARKATH ALI,J The appellant is the claimant in O.P.(M.V) No.2518/1999 on the file of the Principal Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Kozhikode. In this appeal, he challenges the judgment and award of the Tribunal awarding compensation of Rs.1,000/- for the loss caused to the claimant on account of the injuries sustained on him in a motor accident. 2. The accident happened on July 9, 1999 at about 4.45 p.m while the K.S.R.T.C bus bearing registration No.KL-15-1682 collided headon with another bus bearing registration No.KED- 5839. The claimant was the conductor of the K.S.R.T.C bus and he sustained serious injuries. Alleging negligence against the driver of the bus bearing registration No.KED 5839, the claimant filed O.P before the Tribunal under Section 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act claiming a compensation of Rs.1,50,000/-. 3. The 1st respondent, the owner of the bus bearing Registration No.KED-5839 remained absent before the tribunal. M.A.C.A No.166/08 2 The second respondent insurer of the said bus filed a written statement admitting the accident, but attributed negligence to the driver of the K.S.R.T.C bus involved in the accident. Exts.A1 and A2 were marked on the side of the claimant. No evidence was adduced on the side of contesting second respondent. 4. On an appreciation of evidence, the Tribunal found that the accident occurred due to the negligence of the drivers of both the buses and as the claimant did not produce any documents, the Tribunal awarded a compensation of Rs.1,000/- with interest at the rate of 6% per annum from the date of the petition till realisation and proportionate cost. The claimant has now come up in appeal challenging the above said finding of the Tribunal as well as the quantum of compensation awarded by the Tribunal. 5. Heard the learned counsel for the claimant and the learned counsel for the Insurance Company. 6. The following points arise for consideration: i) Whether the finding of the Tribunal that the accident occurred due to negligence of both the drivers can be sustained? M.A.C.A No.166/08 3 ii) Whether the claimant is entitled to any enhanced compensation? 7. The Tribunal found that the accident occurred due to negligence of drivers of both buses on the ground that as the accident occurred due to collision between two buses. We feel that the Tribunal is not justified in entering into such a finding without any evidence on the side of the respondents. Admittedly, an F.I.R was registered against the driver of the bus bearing registration No.KD 5839. Therefore, we set aside the above finding of the Tribunal. As we propose to remand the case to the Tribunal for fresh disposal, we feel that the Tribunal can be directed to consider the question of negligence afresh after affording an opportunity to both sides to adduce further evidence, if any. 8. The Tribunal awarded a compensation of Rs.1,000/- only. The Tribunal has observed that the claimant did not produce any documents to prove his case. But, on going through the records, it can be seen that the claimant produced several documents to prove his injuries as well as the nature of treatment he has undergone. Further, in this appeal also, the M.A.C.A No.166/08 4 claimant produced documents to prove his occupation as well as income. In these circumstances, we feel that the matter has to go back to the Tribunal for deciding afresh the quantum of compensation, if any the claimant is entitled to. The claimant is permitted to take back the documents produced in this appeal and produce the same before the Tribunal. 9. In the result, this appeal is allowed by way of remand. The impugned judgment and award of Tribunal is set aside. The matter is remanded to the Tribunal to decide afresh the question of negligence as well as the quantum of compensation the claimant is entitled to. Both parties are entitled to adduce further evidence, if any, before the Tribunal. The parties shall appear before the Tribunal on 25/05/2011. (A.K.BASHEER, JUDGE) (P.Q.BARKATH ALI, JUDGE) jsr // True Copy// PA to Judge M.A.C.A No.166/08 5 M.A.C.A No.166/08 6 K.M.JOSEPH & M.C.HARI RANI, JJ. .No. of 200 ORDER/JUDGMENT 30/082010