IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE M.N.KRISHNAN THURSDAY, THE 24TH SEPTEMBER 2009 / 2ND ASWINA 1931 MACA.No. 2571 of 2008() ----------------------------------- OPMV.311/2004 of MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS TRIBUNAL, MANJERI .................... APPELLANT/PETITIONER IN M.V.O.P ---------------------------------------------------- A. RUMANA (MINOR), AGED 17 YEARS, D/O. ABDUL RAHIMAN, REP. BY GUARDIAN AND MOTHER RIZANA, W/O. ABDUL RAHIMAN ATHIKKAL HOUSE, P.O. EDAVANNA, ERNAD TALUK, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT. BY ADV. MR.DINESH MATHEW J.MURICKEN MR.P.V.BALAKRISHNAN MR.T.P.RAMESH (THEKKUMTHALA) RESPONDENTS/ RESPONDENTS IN M.V.O.P --------------------------------------------------------------- 1. C. BALAKRISHNAN, S/O.CHINNAPPAN, DOOR NO. 58, NEW NO. 23, MUTHALITHOTTAM, PERIYA SEMUR, ERODE. 2. RAVI, S/O. PALANIAPPAN, 26 N.G.O. COLONY, ERODE. 3. UNITED INDIA INSURANCE CO. LTD., 1176 METTUR ROAD, IIND FLOOR, MUTHIAH COMPLEX, ERODE. 4. P. ABDUL GAFOOR, S/O. ALAVI HAJI, C/O. MOHAMMED, DOOR NO. 168, LIG, UDAYAGIRI, MYSORE-19. 5. A. ABDUL RAHIMAN, S/O. A. ABOOBACKER, P.O. EDAVANNA. 6. UNITED INDIA INSURANCE CO. LTD., A.M. BUILDING, P.B. NO.5, HOSPITAL ROAD, NILAMBUR R3 BY ADV. MR.A.A.MOHAMMED NAZIR. THIS MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS APPEAL HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 24/09/2009, ALONG WITH MACA NO. 2590 OF 2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: rs. M.N. KRISHNAN, J. = = = = = = = = = = = = = = M.A.C.A. NOs. 2571 & 2590 OF 2008 = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = Dated this the 24th day of September, 2009. J U D G M E N T Both these appeals are preferred against the award of the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Manjeri in O.P.(MV) 311/04 and 312/04. The claimants in both these cases were the passengers in a car which was involved in the accident and it had collided with a mini tempo van. Respondents 1 to 3 in the claim petition are the owner, driver and the insurance company of the tempo and respondents 4 to 6 are the driver, owner and insurance company of the car. The accident took place at Ooty and the police has charge sheeted the driver of the car for negligent driving. The Tribunal just because the charge is filed against the car driver without any further materials fixed the liability on the car driver, exonerated the insurance company of the car on the ground that they were gratuitous passengers and exonerated the respondents 1 to 3 in the claim petition on the ground that the said vehicle was not responsible for the M.A.C.A. NOs. 2571 & 2590 OF 2008 -:2:- accident. 2. Now the claimants in this appeal submit before me that no opportunity has been given to the claimants to establish their case. Learned counsel made available before me a petition filed by the claimants on 13.6.2008 whereby they had requested the Tribunal to grant two weeks time to adduce evidence. It is seen the said application was allowed on 17.6.2008 but before the expiry of the two weeks I find on 26th June, 2008, the Tribunal has passed the award. So the grievance is, though time has been granted by allowing the application, the Tribunal did not wait for the time but passed an award without giving an opportunity to the claimants. Whatever it may be, a very perusal of paragraph 6 of the award itself would reveal that the question of negligence has not been considered in the proper perspective in which it is expected to be considered. The finding of the Tribunal is that a charge is filed by the police as Ext.A5 and therefore the driver of the car is responsible. I cannot agree with it, especially in the back drop of the submission that the said driver of the car after a full fledged trial before the criminal court had been acquitted by the said court and the M.A.C.A. NOs. 2571 & 2590 OF 2008 -:3:- said judgment was made available before the Tribunal to arrive at a decision. The Tribunal should have noted the contents of the judgment as well in stead of referring it simply for the purpose of stating that a charge has been filed. The said approach is erroneous. Therefore the matter requires reconsideration and the awards under challenge are set aside and the matter is remitted back to the Tribunal with a direction to grant an opportunity to the claimants as well as the respondents to substantiate their contentions by permitting them to adduce both documentary as well as oral evidence in support of their respective contentions. The claimant herein is directed to take steps to serve notice on the owner and driver of the tempo involved in the accident after he enters appearance before the court below. All parties are directed to appear before the court below on 17.11.2009. M.N. KRISHNAN, JUDGE. ul/-