IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE R.BASANT & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE C.T.RAVIKUMAR FRIDAY, THE 3RD APRIL 2009 / 13TH CHAITHRA 1931 MACA.No. 886 of 2007(G) ---------------------- OPMV.377/2000 of MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS TRIBUNAL, KOZHIKODE .................... APPELLANTS: APPELLANTS/PETITIONERS IN OP MV ------------------------------------------- RAFEEQUE MUHAMMED.P.AGED 24 YEARS, S/O.MUHAMMED, RESIDING AT PALIYIL HOUSE, MALAYAMMA,P.O.,R.E.C.(VIA) KOZHIKODE. BY ADV. SRI.AVM.SALAHUDIN RESPONDENTS:RESPONDENTS IN OP(MV) --------------- 1. P.T.JOSE, AGE NOT KNOWN, S/O.THOMAS, RESIDING AT PUTHOKULAPANAYIL HOUSE, P.O.MUKKAM, ANGUSTIAMUZHI, CALICUT. 2. MOHANAN, AGED 24 YEARS,S/O.ACHUTHAN, RESIDING AT THOTTATHIL HOUSE,POOLAKKOTTU AMSOM,P.O.,NAYARKUZHI,KOZHIKODE. 3. UNITED INDIA INSURANCE COMPANY LIMITED, BRANCH OFFICE,MAVOOR ROAD,KOZHIKODE. ADV. SRI.LIJU. M.P FOR R1 SMT.T.C.SOWMIAVATHY FOR R3 THIS MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS APPEAL HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 03/04/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: R.BASANT & C.T.RAVIKUMAR, JJ. ------------------------------------ M.A.C.A No.886 of 2007 ------------------------------------- Dated this the 3rd day of April, 2009 JUDGMENT BASANT, J. Claimant before the Tribunal is the appellant before us. He claims to be a young person aged 18 years on the date of the accident. He claimed an amount of Rs.2 lakhs as compensation for the injuries suffered by him in a motor accident which took place in 1999. When the matter came up for trial before the Tribunal, Exts.A1 to A5 were marked. No oral evidence was adduced. The Tribunal taking note of the circumstance that nothing was produced to prove negligence which is the foundation in a claim under Section 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act proceeded to pass the impugned award dismissing the claim for compensation. 2. The learned counsel for the appellant submits that the appellant could not adduce evidence on account of reasons beyond his control. It is submitted that the appellant was not informed of the listing of the case for trial. The counsel submits that there was no listing of the case at all and the case was taken up for trial all of a sudden. M.A.C.A No.886 of 2007 2 3. Whatever be the truth on that aspect, we note that proper evidence has not been adduced. We accept the request of the learned counsel that one more opportunity may be granted to the appellant to adduce evidence. 4. In the result: i) This appeal is allowed in part; ii) The impugned award is set aside; iii) The Tribunal is directed to dispose of the claim afresh in accordance with law. 5. Issue a copy of this judgment to the learned counsel for the appellant straight away. The appellant/counsel shall appear before the Tribunal on 11.05.2009. The Tribunal shall dispose of the matter afresh. We make it clear that the appellant is not be entitled for any interest for the period from 12.10.2006 the date of the impugned award to 11.05.2009 as the delay during that period is solely attributable to the appellant. (R.BASANT, JUDGE) (C.T.RAVIKUMAR, JUDGE) rtr/-