IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE M.N.KRISHNAN FRIDAY, THE 23RD JANUARY 2009 / 3RD MAGHA 1930 MACA.No. 1031 of 2008() ----------------------- OPMV.82/2004 of MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS TRIBUNAL, KOTTAYAM .................... APPELLANT(S): APPELLANT/ RESPONDENT ----------------------------------- BALAKRISHNAN, KUZHIYATHE VEEDU, MUNNILAM, ADOOR, PATHANAMTHITTA. BY ADV. SRI.P.C.SASIDHARAN RESPONDENT(S): PETITIONER & RESPONDENTS 2 & 3 -------------------------------------------- 1. SARAMMA THOMAS, KALACHANDRA HOUSE, CHINGAVANAM. 2. JOHN JOSEPH (BAIJU), MUNNELPARAMBIL HOUSE, POOVANTHURUTHU KARA, MUTHENMALIYIL BHAGOM, NATTAKOM VILLAGE. 3. THE NATIONAL INSURANCE CO. LTD, KOTTAYAM. ADV. SRI.M.J.THOMAS FOR R1 SRI.M.A.GEORGE FOR R3 THIS MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS APPEAL HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 23/01/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: M.A.C.A.NO. 1031/2008 ORDER ON I.A. 1242/2008 IN M.A.C.A.NO. 1031/2008 DISMISSED. SD/- M.N. KRISHNAN, JUDGE 23.01.2008 //TRUE COPY// P.A. TO JUDGE. M.N. KRISHNAN, J ----------------------- M.A.C.A.No. 1031 OF 2008 --------------------------------- Dated this the 23rd day of January, 2009 JUDGMENT This appeal is preferred against the award of the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Kottayam in O.P.(MV) No.82/2004. It is the case of the claimant that while he was walking along the road he was hit by a vehicle owned by 1st respondent and driven by 2nd respondent resulting in injuries to him. In the award the number of the motorbike is shown as KL/5-3587. The tribunal after considering the materials available awarded a compensation of Rs. 58,000/- and directed respondents 1 and 2 in the claim petition to pay the amount. The 3rd respondent was exonerated from the liability for the reason that there was no insurance. It is against that decision the 1st respondent Balakrishnan has come up in appeal. 2. A perusal of the memorandum of appeal and the documents produced along with the appeal would show that here is an attempt to raise a contention regarding the very involvement of his vehicle. This appellant though entered appearance through a counsel did not file a written statement before the court below. He had produced M.A.C.A.No. 1031/2008 -2- photocopy of the petition wherein the registration number of the vehicle involved is shown as KL/5-3857 in para 15 of the claim petition. The same is seen reported in para 28 of the petition as well. So a perusal of the petition would show that the claimant has sustained injuries on account of the vehicle bearing registration No. KL/5-3857. The award would show the number of the vehicle as KL/5-3587. As Annexure A2, the appellant had produced the registration particulars of KL 5/3857. The owner of that vehicle is shown as K.N. Ramachandran Nair. So an attempt is made by the appellant for shifting the case from him. Unfortunately for verifying the real situation, the claimant did not produce the charge sheet or scene mahazar and only the F.I.R was produced. The present appellant did not contest the case also. If we go by the claim petition the number is different from what is seen in the award. So the matter requires consideration. I am making it very clear, if it is a typographical error and really the vehicle of the appellant is involved in the accident exemplary cost will be awarded against him and in favour of the claimant. But I do not want to shutout the case by not permitting the parties to put forward their case before the tribunal. M.A.C.A.No. 1031/2008 -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 necessary documentary evidence as well as oral evidence in support of their respective contentions and then dispose of the matter in accordance with law. The amount deposited shall remain in court deposit till a final decision is taken in the matter. Parties are directed to appear before the tribunal on 27.2.2009. M.N. KRISHNAN,JUDGE vkm