IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE A.K.BASHEER & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.Q.BARKATH ALI TUESDAY, THE 1ST JUNE 2010 / 11TH JYAISTHA 1932 MACA.No. 1772 of 2005 ------------------------- (OP(MV)1023/99 of ADDL.MOTOR ACCIDENTS CLAIMS TRIBUNAL/ ADDL.DISTRICT JUDGE, THALASSERRY) APPELLANT(S): APPELLANT/PETITIONER ------------------------------------------- BASHEER, S/O.KHADERKUTTY, NOOR MAHAL, KOORANMUKKU, ULIYIL.P.O., MATTANNUR (VIA). BY ADV. SRI.GRASHIOUS KURIAKOSE RESPONDENT(S): --------------- 1. M.SAJEEVKUMAR, S/O.GOVINDAN, THILLENKERRY.P.O., KATTANNUR (VIA), KANNUR DISTRICT. 2. P.C.BEEJA, W/O.PAVITHRAN, VALIYAKELOTH HOUSE, P.O.VARAM. 3. THE NEW INDIA ASSURANCE COMPANY LTD., KANNUR. ADV. SRI.P.G.GANAPPAN FOR R3 THIS MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS APPEAL HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 01/06/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: A.K. Basheer & P.Q. Barkath Ali, JJ. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - M.A.C.A.No. 1772 of 2005 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Dated this the 1st day of June, 2010 Judgment Basheer, J: This appeal is at the instance of the claimant in an application seeking compensation under Section 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act. Appellant contended that he had suffered injuries in a motor accident and therefore sought compensation from the owner, driver and the insurer, the respondents herein. The Tribunal, after considering the oral and documentary evidence adduced by the appellant held that he had failed to establish that he had sustained injuries in a motor accident as alleged by him. Therefore the claim petition was dismissed with a cost of Rs.1000/-. The said award is under challenge in this appeal. 2. The case of the appellant in brief was that on June 8, 1998 at about 6 P.M while he was driving an autorickshaw from Mattannur to Kannur, a bus owned by respondent No.2 and driven by respondent No.1 collided with it at a place called Chalode. Resultantly the appellant sustained serious injuries. He was removed to A.K.G. Hospital at Kannur immediately by the neighbouring shop keepers and from there to Medical College Hospital at Calicut. 3. Appellant produced Exts.A1 to A5 on his side, apart from examining himself as Pw.1 and a witness of his as Pw.2. Ext.X1 case sheet maintained at the Medical College Hospital in respect of his treatment was also marked in the case. There was no oral or IMACA.1772/05. : 2 : documentary evidence on the side of the respondents. Significantly respondents 1 and 2 did not appear and contest the case at all. 4. As mentioned earlier, the Tribunal placing reliance on Ext.A1 photocopy of the First Information Report in the crime registered by the Police in this connection, took the view that there was no satisfactory evidence on record to show that the appellant had sustained any injury in a motor accident as claimed by him. The Tribunal also took note of the inconsistent version given by Pw.2 in his evidence. The crucial aspect which persuaded the Tribunal to hold against the appellant was that in Ext.A1 First Information Report Pw.2 who was the informant had mentioned the name of the victim as one Ashraf. In other words, Pw.2 did not mention the name of the appellant (Basheer) as the victim. But Pw.2, while he was examined in Court had explained that he had mentioned the name of one Ashraf to the Police on the basis of the information gathered by him immediately after the accident took place. He further stated that he had later on informed the Police that it was not Ashraf but one Basheer who was driving the autorickshaw at the time of the accident. But the Tribunal did not accept the above version. 5. In this context it is pertinent to note that Ext.A3 wound certificate clearly revealed that the appellant was taken to A.K.G.Hospital at Kannur within one hour after the occurrence of the accident. Ext.X1 case sheet maintained at the Medical College IMACA.1772/05. : 3 : Hospital also revealed that the appellant had suffered injuries in the accident at Chalode referred to above. Exts.A4 and A5 reference card and medical bills also substantiated the contention of the appellant that he had suffered injuries as a result of the accident. 6. Having carefully perused the entire materials available in the lower court records, we have no hesitation to hold that the Tribunal committed serious error in dismissing the application on the ground that the appellant had not substantiated his case as regards the injury suffered by him in the accident. Therefore the award is set aside. The case is remitted back to the Tribunal for fresh consideration and disposal in accordance with law. 7. The appeal is allowed in the above terms. The parties shall appear before the Tribunal on July 3, 2010. A.K. Basheer Judge. P.Q. Barkath Ali Judge. an.