IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE C.N.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE C.K.ABDUL REHIM MONDAY, THE 1ST JUNE 2009 / 11TH JYAISHTA 1931 MACA.No. 1401 of 2006() ----------------------- OPMV.1390/2000 of MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS TRIBUNAL, PERUMBAVOOR .................... APPELLANT(S): APPELLANT/PETITIONER ----------------------------------- ABDUL SHAFEEQ, S/O. ABDUL KAREEM, CHERUMOODAN HOUSE, NEDUMTHODU, VENGOLA VILLAGE, PERUMBAVOOR. BY ADV. SRI.M.M.SAIDU MUHAMMED RESPONDENT(S): RESPONDENTS --------------------------- 1. M.G.LALU, KAIPPILLY PARAMBU HOUSE, KALOOR, COCHIN-17. 2. MOHAMMED KOYA, S/O. IBRAHIM, MANATH THOPPIL HOUSE, KAKKANADU KARA, THRIKKAKARA VILLAGE. 3. NATIONAL INSURANCE CO. LTD., STATUE JUNCTION, THRIPPUNITHURA. BY ADV. SRI.P.M.ZIRAJ FOR R.1 BY ADV. SRI.M.A.ABDUL HAKHIM FOR R2 BY ADV. SRI.JYOTHISH.J.KALLINGAL FOR R2 BY ADV. SMT.SARAH SALVY FOR R3 THIS MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS APPEAL HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 01/06/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: C .N. RAMACHANDRAN NAIR & C. K. ABDUL REHIM, JJ. -------------------------------------------- M.A.C.A. No. 1401 OF 2006 -------------------------------------------- Dated this the 1st day of June, 2009 JUDGMENT Ramachandran Nair,J. Appeal is filed against rejection of claim petition for the reason that accident was on account of skidding of the two wheeler driven by the appellant. We have heard counsel appearing for the appellant and standing counsel appearing for the third respondent. On going through the records, we feel the finding of the MACT that accident is on account of skidding is not tenable because MACT has just relied on the statement by somebody before the hospital authorities that accident was as a result of skidding of the vehicle. It is seen that FIR was registered by the police on the same day of the accident, and appellant gave a statement that the accident occurred on account of Bus overtaking the bike, and turning to the left, leading to collision between the bike and the Bus at the left-side rear of the bus. Eventhough counsel for the insurance company pointed out that Asst. Motor Vehicle Inspector who inspected the Bus found no damage to the Bus, we do not think the absence of any visible damage on the Bus is sufficient evidence to deny that the bike hit the Bus. The only evidence relied on by the 2 MACT is the wound certificate where the hospital authorities have recorded that accident is as a result of skidding of the vehicle. Since the identity of the person who gave the statement or even the name of the person is not stated, we do not think the statement of the hospital authorities is sufficient to conclude that appellant caused the accident by himself. It is seen initially the accident was accepted by the insurance company and through amendment only they put up the case of denial later. In the circumstances, we feel rejection of the claim petition is not tenable. However, considering the injuries sustained by the appellant and considering the fact that accident was nine years back, instead of remanding the case to the Tribunal, we award a compensation of Rs. 15,000/- with interest at 7.5 per cent per annum from the date of application till date of payment. Appeal is allowed as above. (C.N.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR) Judge. (C. K. ABDUL REHIM) Judge. kk 3