IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE J.B.KOSHY & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.P.BALACHANDRAN TUESDAY, THE 14TH OCTOBER 2008 / 22ND ASWINA 1930 MACA.No. 2165 of 2008 -------------------------------------- OPMV.1802/2001 of II ADDL.MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS TRIBUNAL, KOLLAM .................... APPELLANT/PETITIONER: P.M. MURALEEDHARAN, S/O. MADHAVAN, POURNAMI, KOIVILA.P.O, KOIVILA. BY ADV. SRI.P.B.SAHASRANAMAN SRI.K.JAGADEESH SRI.T.S.HARIKUMAR RESPONDENTS/RESPONDENTS: 1. SUDHEERKUMAR, S/O. SUNDARESAN, KARAYIL HOUSE, PUTHENTHURA, NEENDAKARA, KOLLAM. 2. THE DISTRICT INSURANCE OFFICER, KERALA STATE INSURANCE DEPARTMENT, PALACE WARD, THEVALLY, KOLLAM. THIS MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS APPEAL HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 14/10/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: J.B.Koshy & K.P.Balachandran, JJ. --------------------------------- M.A.C.A.No.2165 of 2008 --------------------------------- JUDGMENT Koshy, J. The appellant/petitioner, at the age of 43, sustained injuries in a motor accident on 29.1.2001. He filed an application claiming compensation contending that the accident occurred when a Hero Honda motor cycle bearing Reg.No.KL- 2/G 8251, ridden by the first respondent, attempted to overtake his vehicle it hit on his knee and thereby he sustained injuries. According to him, immediately he was taken to A.M. Hospital, Karunagappally from where he was referred to the Medical College Hospital, Thiruvananthapuram. On his way he was admitted in Sanker's Hospital, Kollam and on the next day he was referred to the Medical College Hospital, Thiruvananthapuram. Since he wanted better treatment, he was admitted in S.P.Fort Hospital, Thiruvananthapuram. He claimed MACA 2165/08 2 compensation as there was fracture of right knee. At the hospital, he told the doctor that the injury was caused on account of a fall from the motor cycle. He did not say that it was due to the hit by a Hero Honda motor cycle or any other motor vehicle is involved in the accident. Therefore, it was not reported to the police. FIR was filed only on 8.2.2001, after ten days of the alleged accident. From this, the Tribunal found as follows: “But, as already pointed out, it is clear from the available evidence that the accident has not occurred on account of any rashness or negligence on the part of the first respondent, but, it was due to a fall from the motor cycle in which the petitioner was travelling and he has managed to get a case registered against the first respondent, most probably with the connivance and help of the MACA 2165/08 3 police so as to lodge a bogus claim after the lapse of about ten days. So, it is held that the petitioner has failed to establish that the accident was due to the rash and negligent riding of the first respondent and this issue is answered accordingly.” The appellant was employed as a Sub Engineer in the KSEB. His employment was not affected. After going through the evidence on record the Tribunal found that the accident has not occurred due to the negligence of the first respondent. We fully agree with the views of the Tribunal. The appeal is, thus, dismissed. (J.B.Koshy, Judge) 14th October, 2008 (K.P.Balachandran, Judge) tkv