IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE M.N.KRISHNAN TUESDAY, THE 17TH AUGUST 2010 / 26TH SRAVANA 1932 MACA.No. 1487 of 2009() ----------------------- OPMV.145/2003 of PRL. MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS TRIBUNAL, KOZHIKODE .................... APPELLANT: PETITIONER ------------------------ RAGHAVAN, S/O.KUTTY, AGED 50 YEARS, PALATHODI HOUSE, P.O.GURUVAYURAPPAN COLLEGE, KOZHIKODE. BY ADV. SMT.LATHA PRABHAKARAN RESPONDENTS/RESPONDENTS: ------------------------------------ 1. M.BHARATHAN, NAGATHINGAL THAPPALI PADAM, P.O. G.A.COLLEGE, KOZHIKODE. 2. ABDUL AZEEZ, S/O.KUNHATHU, VALAPPIL HOUSE, P.O.MANKAVU, KOZHIKODE. 3. UNITED INDIA INSURANCE CO. LTD. NO.II, PB NO.192, SEEMA TOWER, MAVOOR ROAD, KOZHIKODE. ADV. SRI.RAJESH THOMAS FOR R3 THIS MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS APPEAL HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 17/08/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: M.N. KRISHNAN, J. = = = = = = = = = = = M.A.C.A. No. 1487 OF 2009 = = = = = = = = == = DATED THIS, THE 17TH DAY OF AUGUST, 2010. J U D G M E N T This is an appeal preferred against the award of the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Kozhikode, in O.P. (MV) 145 of 2003. The Tribunal dismissed the case with compensatory cost of Rs. 5000/-. It is against that decision the appeal is preferred. 2. The Tribunal found that the case filed by the claimant in O.P. (MV) 145/2003 is a false and vexatious claim and therefore, he is liable to pay compensatory costs. I had also perused the records available and heard the learned counsel for both sides. I feel there cannot be a better inconsistent case than the present one. In the claim petition, it is averred that the claimant was riding a scooter bearing Reg. No. KL 11/G 1885 and it was hit by another scooter bearing Reg. N. KL 11/8045 which was coming in an exorbitant speed. Thereafter, the claimant moved an application as I.A. 7840/2004 wherein he wanted to amend the petition and substitute as the "pillion rider" of the said scooter. It is also stated in the body that he was a pillion rider of the scooter bearing Reg. No. KL 11/8045. Again, he moved another application as I.A. 769/2005 for MACA 1487/2009 2 rectifying the mistakes. In that application, he wanted to change the number of the vehicle from KL 11/G 1885 to KL 11/8045. He wanted to change the word from "rider" to "pillion rider". He again wanted to amend the petition stating that "KL 11/8045 was coming in an exorbitant speed" to be corrected into "a normal speed". So there is a total change made by the claimant before the Tribunal. The Tribunal was approached with a feeling that he was riding a scooter bearing KL 11 G 1885 and that the other vehicle came in a rash and negligent manner and hit on the vehicle. But subsequently, the claimant had changed the vehicle, not only he has ceased to be the rider of KL 11/G 1885, but also wanted to station himself as the pillion rider of the other vehicle. In the petition, he would submit that it was due to the negligent driving of the vehicle KL 11/G1885 that the accident occurred by using the word "exorbitant speed" and suddenly sought to change the same as "normal speed". So, the case put forward by the claimant is inconsistent to the core. It is again interesting to note that not even a wound certificate relating to him is produced in this case. It is not seen from the records that he is involved in the accident as well. What else can the Tribunal do other than to dismiss the claim? I feel the approach by the Tribunal is totally correct in dismissing the application. MACA 1487/2009 3 3. Learned counsel for the appellant would submit that this Court shall show some leniency at least with respect to the compensatory costs. One is not able to find out the truth though the petitioner is not entitled to get any relief. Therefore, considering these facts, I am inclined to reduce the compensatory cost from Rs. 5,000/- to Rs. 1,000/-. Therefore, the appeal is disposed of with the only modification that instead of the compensatory cost being Rs. 5,000/- it shall be Rs. 1,000/-. I hope that better wisdom will prevail in people in charge of litigations while filing applications of this nature. The appeal is disposed of accordingly. M.N. KRISHNAN, (JUDGE) KNC/-