IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE M.N.KRISHNAN MONDAY, THE 13TH SEPTEMBER 2010 / 22ND BHADRA 1932 MACA.No. 1725 of 2009(G) ------------------------------ OPMV.1177/2004 of MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS TRIBUNAL, PERUMBAVOOR .................... APPELLANT(S): PETITIONER IN OPMV.1177/04 -------------------------------------------------------- PADMANABHAN,S/O.SHANKU, AGED 67 YEARS,CHAKKAMATH (H),NORTH SIVA TEMPLE, THANKULAM,MALA PALLIPPURAM P.O.,POYYA VILLAGE, THRISSUR DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.V.K.GOPALAKRISHNA PILLAI RESPONDENT(S): RESPONDENTS IN OPMV.1177/04 ----------------------------------------------------------- 1. T.P.SRIDHARAN,S/O.RAGHAVAN NAMBIAR, 'USHUS' NIVAS,NEAR NAS THEATRE, ANGAMALY,PIN 683 572. 2. NATIONAL INSURANCE CO.LTD., DIV.NO.10,FLAT NO.101-106,N-1 BMC HOUSE, CONNAUGHT PLACE,NEW DELHI 110 001. 3. UNITED INDIA INSURANCE CO.LTD., SREEKUMAR BUILDING,P.B.NO. SOUTH JUNCTION,CHALAKUDY-680 307. ADV. SMT.RAJI T.BHASKAR FOR R2 THIS MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS APPEAL HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 13/09/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: M.N. KRISHNAN, J. = = = = = = = = = = = = = = M.A.C.A. NO. 1725 OF 2009 = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = Dated this the 13th day of September, 2010. J U D G M E N T This appeal is preferred against the award of the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Perumbavoor in O.P.(MV)1177/04. The claimant, a pillion rider to a scooter, sustained injuries which according to him was on account of a Maruthi car hitting on the scooter resulting in injuries to him. The Tribunal found the materials are inadequate to prove the negligence and accident and therefore dismissed the case. It is against that decision the claimant has come up in appeal. 2. Heard the counsel for the appellant as well as the National Insurance Company. A perusal of the award would reveal that the claimant met with an accident. The claimant was taken to a private hospital and then to a Government hospital. The defect noted by the Tribunal is that it was only mentioned as a road traffic accident and in the wound certificate it was not mentioned it was on account of a M.A.C.A. 1725 OF 2009 -:2:- collision between the scooter and a car. Two points noted by the Tribunal was that there was no damages for the car and therefore it should have been a self accident of the scooter. The police after due investigation has filed a charge sheet against the car driver. Non appearance of damages in the car might have been on account of the fact that the case was registered only after 4 days after the accident by which time it could have been repaired. Similarly, the nature of damages sustained even to the scooter is very minimal. Therefore taking into consideration these aspects the Tribunal should not have come to a hurried conclusion that the accident is not proved. But it is necessary for the claimant to satisfy the conscience of the Court regarding the accident and involvement of the car. So I am inclined to grant an opportunity. 3. Therefore the award under challenge is set aside and the matter is remitted back to the Tribunal with a direction to permit all concerned to produce documentary as well as oral evidence in support of their respective M.A.C.A. 1725 OF 2009 -:3:- contentions and then dispose of the matter in accordance with law. The claimant is directed to take out notice to the driver of the car as well as United India Insurance Company for further consideration and disposal in accordance with law. Parties are directed to appear before the Tribunal on 28.10.2010. M.N. KRISHNAN, JUDGE. ul/-