IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.R.RAMAN & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.R.RAMACHANDRA MENON FRIDAY, THE 13TH NOVEMBER 2009 / 22ND KARTHIKA 1931 MACA.No. 1169 of 2008() ----------------------- AGAINST THE AWARD DATED 02.08.2007 IN OPMV.970/2002 of MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS TRIBUNAL, KOZHIKODE .................... APPELLANT(S): APPELLANT/PETITIONER ---------------------------------- P.C.ANNIE, AGED 45 YEARS, WIFE OF JOHN PETER, 'MIZPA', KOTTOOLI POST, KOZHIKODE. BY ADV. SRI.JACOB ABRAHAM SMT.KOCHUMOL KODUVATH RESPONDENT(S): RESPONDENTS -------------------------- 1. M.S.VALSAN, AGED 57 YEARS, SON OF PANNKUTTY, SREEVALSOM HOUSE, CHETTIKULAM, ELATHUR, KOZHIKODE. 2. THE BRANCH MANAGER, ORIENTAL INSURANCE CO. LTD., SREENIDHI BUILDING, P.O.NO.27, NARAYANA NAGAR, VATAKARA, KOZHIKODE. ADV. SRI.TITUS MANI FOR R2 THIS MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS APPEAL HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 13/11/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: P.R. RAMAN & P.R. RAMACHANDRA MENON, JJ. ----------------------------------------------- M.A.C.A. No. 1169 of 2008 --------------------------------------------- Dated, this the 13th day of November, 2009 J U D G M E N T P.R.Raman, J. In a road traffic accident the appellant sustained severe injuries. The appellant filed an application before the Court below claiming an amount of Rs.50,000/- by way of compensation under various heads. The appellant was a pillion rider in the motor cycle and while going from Koya road to Parayancheri a bus coming in the opposite direction bearing registration No. KRD 7210 came in a rash negligent manner and dashed against the motor cycle as a result of which the appellant sustained serious injuries. He was taken to the hospital under went treatment. He claimed an amount Rs.1,50,000/- under various heads towards compensation. The Tribunal found that the accident occurred as a result of negligence on the part of the bus driver. Hence the only issue for consideration is regarding the adequacy of the compensation awarded. 2. The grievance of the appellant is that though the certain documents to prove the income of the appellant were produced along with the application, the same could not be marked. Further to prove the serious injuries sustained, no oral evidence could be tendered. Appellant MACA No. 1169 of 2008 2 prays the opportunity to adduce evidence. We heard both the sides. The Court below marked only two exhibits i.e., Ext.A1 FIR and Ext.A2 discharge summery and it is not marked through anybody. However, since this records are not marked and if the appellant wishes to produce any further documents in respect of the claim made in the application, and by allowing such request, no prejudice will be caused to the respondent. In the circumstances, the proper course open to this Court is to remand the case for fresh consideration so as to enable the appellant to adduce additional evidence with equal opportunity to the respondent also to adduce any further evidence in respect of their case. However, if any additional compensation is awarded by the Tribunal pursuant to remand after consideration of additional evidence, the said amount shall not carry any interest. This is to ensure that a fresh opportunity to a party to adduce evidence in the absence of proof of denial of such opportunity can't cause any prejudice while remedies are moulded. Appeal is allowed by way of remand. P.R. RAMAN, JUDGE P. R. RAMACHANDRA MENON, JUDGE dnc