IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE A.K.BASHEER & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.Q.BARKATH ALI FRIDAY, THE 19TH MARCH 2010 / 28TH PHALGUNA 1931 MACA.No. 1542 of 2007() ----------------------- OPMV.93/2001 of MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS TRIBUNAL, MANJERI .................... APPELLANT/PETITIONER ---------------------------------- KAVANNAYIL MOIDU, S/O.ENU, KAVANNAYIL HOUSE, THELAKKAD P.O. BY ADV. SRI.K.M.SATHYANATHA MENON RESPONDENT(S): RESPONDENTS -------------------------- 1. MOHAMMED ASHRAF, S/O.ABOOBACKER, CHOLAYIL HOUSE, KARYAVATTOM, P.O.MANNARMALA (OWNER). 2. ERAYATH ABDUL AZEEZ, S/O.MOHAMMED, ERAYATH HOUSE, KARYAVATTOM, P.O.MANNARMALA (DRIVER). 3. M/S.UNITED INDIA INSURANCE CO.LTD., PERINTHALMANNA. ADV. SRI.K.V.PAVITHRAN FOR R1 SMT.T.C.SOWMIAVATHY FOR R3 THIS MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS APPEAL HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 19/03/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: A.K.BASHEER & P.Q.BARKATH ALI, JJ. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - M.A.C.A.No.1542 OF 2007 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Dated this the 19th day of March, 2010 JUDGMENT Basheer, J. This appeal is directed against the award passed in a claim petition filed under The Motor Vehicles Act. As against a claim of Rs. 1,50,000/-, the Tribunal awarded only a sum of Rs. 11,300/- especially since the appellant had not produced any material to show that he had suffered any serious injuries or that he had incurred medical expenses for his treatment. Appellant had even failed to adduce any oral evidence leave alone any documentary evidence, in support of his claim. 2. However, learned counsel for the appellant submits that the appellant could not appear before the Tribunal because of some communication gap between him and his counsel. Immediately after the Tribunal passed the impugned award, appellant had produced the entire medical documents available with him like treatment certificate, discharge summary, medical bills etc. before the Tribunal. A petition for review was also filed while producing those documents. But the Tribunal dismissed the review petition. 3. We have perused the lower court records which were called for. MACA.No.1542/07 2 Evidently, the appellant had produced large number of documents along with his review petition. It appears that the appellant had spent substantial amount for his treatment. It also appears that he suffered compound fracture of both bones of his left leg. Learned counsel submits that appellant deserves sympathy. 4. We have heard learned counsel for the Insurance Company also. She submits that the vehicle involved in the accident was covered under a valid insurance policy. 5. Having regard to the entire facts and circumstances of the case and having perused the lower court records, we are satisfied that the appellant can be afforded another opportunity to substantiate his claim ; but only on terms. 6. Therefore, the impugned award is set aside. The case is remitted to the Tribunal on condition that the appellant pays a sum of Rs. 3000/- to the High Court Legal Services Committee within ten days from today. If the cost is not paid as directed above, the Appeal will stand dismissed. Send back the Lower Court records forthwith. A.K.BASHEER, JUDGE P.Q.BARKATH ALI, JUDGE sv. MACA.No.1542/07 3