IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE C.N.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE C.K.ABDUL REHIM THURSDAY, THE 11TH JUNE 2009 / 21ST JYAISHTA 1931 MACA.No. 1151 of 2007() ----------------------- OPMV.1108/1996 of MOTOR ACCIDENTS CLAIMS TRIBUNAL, MAVELIKKARA .................... APPELLANT(S): APPELLANT/PETITIONER: ----------------------------------- MAJEED KUTTY, S/O.MUHAMMED KUNJU, PUNJAVELIMBEL KIZHAKKATHIL, KRISHNAPURAM MURI, KRISHNAPURAM VILLAGE. BY ADV. SRI.S.MOHANAN SRI.R.REJI RESPONDENT(S): RESPONDENTS: --------------------------- 1. M.V. MOHANAN, S/O. K.K. VASU, KIDAMGIL HOUSE, PARUMALA, MANNAR. 2. P.K. SIVADASAN, S/O. KUTTAPPAN, PARE VEETTIL, MANJADITHARA, PALLICKAL, KATTANAM, MAVELIKKARA TALUK. 3. UNITED INDIA INSURANCE CO. LTD., KAYAMKULAM BRANCH. ADV. SRI.K.V.ANIL KUMAR FOR R1 & R2 SMT.P.K.SANTHAMMA FOR R3 THIS MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS APPEAL HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 11/06/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: C.N.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR & C.K.ABDUL REHIM, JJ. .................................................................... M.A.C.A. No.1151 of 2007 .................................................................... Dated this the 11th day of June, 2009. JUDGMENT Ramachandran Nair, J. Appeal is filed against dismissal of a claim petition by the MACT for the reason that accident happened while the vehicle was not on movement. Even though appellant put forward a claim that accident happened when the vehicle was moved in the reverse direction by the driver carelessly, on enquiry by Police it was found that accident happened while unloading the goods by appellant himself. It appears from the Police report that appellant untied the rope carelessly which led to fall of the marble on him causing injury. Therefore, as against the claim of the appellant, MACT found that the accident happened while unloading the goods. Counsel for the appellant, however, stated that even going by the case of the respondents, appellant will be entitled to compensation by virtue of decision of this court in RAJAN V. JOHN reported in 2009(1) KLT 573. In the above decision this court has held that loading and unloading work is also use of the 2 vehicle and so much so, accident arising while loading and unloading will also entitle the injured for compensation. Standing Counsel for the Insurance Company pointed out that here again, there is negligence on the part of the appellant disentitling him for compensation. We feel the matter requires to be reconsidered by MACT because based on the decision abovereferred, appellant is entitled for compensation as he was found to be engaged in unloading goods and the accident happened during the course of unloading. We, therefore, set aside the order of the MACT rejecting claim petition and restore the claim petition to the MACT with direction to the MACT, Mavelikkara to give opportunity to the parties afresh and decide the claim for compensation. C.N.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR Judge C.K.ABDUL REHIM Judge pms