IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE M.N.KRISHNAN THURSDAY, THE 29TH MAY 2008 / 8TH JYAISHTA 1930 MACA.No. 850 of 2005() ------------------------------- OPMV.829/1997 of MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS TRIBUNAL, PALA .................... APPELLANT/2ND RESPONDENT IN O.P.(MV.): --------------------------------------------------------------- THE MANAGING DIRECTOR, KERALA STATE ROAD TRANSPORT CORPORATION, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. BY ADV. SRI.SAJEEVKUMAR K.GOPAL, SC, KSRTC RESPONDENTS/PETITIONER AND 1ST RESPONDENT IN O.P.(MV):- -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 1. T.T. FRANCIS (BABU), THANNIPARAYIL HOUSE, KOZHUVANAL, PULIYANNOOR VILLAGE. 2. P.A. BABU, VADAKKEDATHU HOUSE, EZHACHERY P.O. BY ADV. SRI.VIJU ABRAHAM - R1 SRI.BENOY K.KADAVAN - R1 THIS MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS APPEAL HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 29/05/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: pa M.N.KRISHNAN, J. -------------------------- M.A.C.A. No. 850 OF 2005 --------------------- Dated this the 29th day of May, 2008 JUDGMENT This appeal is preferred against the award of the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Pala, in OP(MV) No.829/97. The application for compensation is filed by the rider of the bike, who is the first respondent herein. The case is that while he was proceeding, a KSRTC bus which came in a rash and negligent manner hit on the bike resulting in injuries to him. The Tribunal found that there had been negligence on the side of both the drivers and therefore apportioned the negligence at 60% on the KSRTC driver and 40% on the rider of the bike. There was another OP (MV) No. 28/97 wherein also under the same award the negligence was apportioned. An appeal was preferred by the KSRTC as MACA 848/05 and a Division Bench of this court had confirmed the finding of the Claims Tribunal with respect to the negligence. Therefore the said finding has become final and hence the question of apportionment of negligence cannot be changed in this case. So far as compensation is concerned, it is only a reasonable amount that is awarded and 40% is deducted for the contributory negligence which also does not suffer from any infirmity. Therefore the appeal fails and the same is dismissed. M.N.KRISHNAN, JUDGE vps