IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE M.N.KRISHNAN THURSDAY, THE 14TH JANUARY 2010 / 24TH POUSHA 1931 MACA.No. 2030 of 2009() ----------------------- OPMV.65/2004 of MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS TRIBUNAL, WAYANAD, KALPETTA .................... APPELLANT(S): (PETITIONER): ---------------------------------------------- THANKACHAN ANTONY, AGED 44 YEARS, S/O.ANTONY, "JYOTHIS", NEAR KRIPA HOSPITAL ROAD, KALPETTA POST, VYTHIRI TALUK, WAYANAD DISTRICT. BY ADV. MR.N.J.ANTONY RESPONDENT(S): (RESPONDENTS): ------------------------------------------------------ 1. AJITH BABU, AGED 27 YEARS, S/O.ALAVI, THOTTOPURAM VEEDU, CHANDAKUNNU, NILAMBUR, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT. (DRIVER OF LORRY NO.KL-11Q/9420 D.L.NO.NOT KNOWN). 2. P.V.MUHAMMED ANVAR, AGE NOT KNOWN, S/O.FATHIMA, (PROP.LAND HOUSE, THAMARASSERY), PATHANPURAYIL HOUSE, THAMARASSERY, KOZHIKODE DIST. (OWNER OF LORRY NO.KL-11Q/9420). 3. ORIENTAL INSURANCE CO.LTD., BRANCH OFFICE, KINGSWAY BUILDING, MAVOOR ROAD JUNCTION, CALICUT. (POLICY NO.6881/03. VALID FROM 27/12/02 TO 26/12/03. R3 BY ADV. MR.P.JAYASANKAR THIS MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS APPEAL HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 14/01/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: Kss M.N. KRISHNAN, J. ........................................... M.A.C.A.No.2030 OF 2009 ............................................. Dated this the 14th day of January, 2010. J U D G M E N T This is an appeal preferred against the award of the Claims Tribunal, Kalpetta in OP(MV)No.65/2004. The claimant, a village officer, while riding on his motor bike met with an accident on account of a collision between his vehicle and a lorry resulting in injuries to him. He had sustained fracture of the malleolus and the Tribunal after deducting 50% of the contributory negligence, awarded him Rs.4,075/=. It is against that, the claimant has come up in appeal. 2. A perusal of the award would indicate that the Tribunal has not applied its mind to the facts of the case at all. PW1 was examined and Ext.A2 mahazar was produced. The Tribunal did not refer to the scene mahazar. It just held that charge sheet is not produced and therefore contributory negligence is attributed. It is an erroneous finding which has to be corrected. Similarly the claimant has produced : 2 : M.A.C.A.No.2030 OF 2009 earned leave certificate which is also not taken into consideration at all by the Tribunal. It has to be borne in mind that the claimant had sustained fracture of the malleolus and I feel that adequacy of the compensation also requires reconsideration. 3. Therefore the award under challenge is set aside and the matter is remitted back to the Tribunal with a direction to permit all concerned to produce both documentary as well as oral evidence in support of their respective contentions and then dispose of the matter in accordance with law. The insurance company also be permitted to raise all the contentions since respondents 1 and 2 have chosen to remain ex parte in the original proceedings. The parties are directed to appear before the Tribunal on 22.02.2010. Disposed of accordingly. M.N. KRISHNAN, JUDGE cl : 3 :