IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE M.N.KRISHNAN WEDNESDAY, THE 3RD MARCH 2010 / 12TH PHALGUNA 1931 MACA.No. 2208 of 2009() ----------------------- OPMV.434/2002 of MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS TRIBUNAL, IRINJALAKUDA .................... APPELLANT(S): PETITIONERS 2 TO 8: -------------------------------------------------------- 1. SIVARAMAN, S/O.GOVINDAN & LAKSHMI, POTHIKKARA HOUSE, PARAKKATTUKARA DESOM, MURIYAD VILLAGE, P.O.MUKUNDAPURAM TALUK. 2. MANI, S/O.GOVINDAN & LAKSHMI, POTHIKKARA HOUSE, PARAKKATTUKARA DESOM, MURIYAD VILLAGE P.O,MUKUNDAPURAM TALUK. 3. KUTTAN, S/O.GOVINDAN & LAKSHMI, POTHIKKARA HOUSE, PARAKKATTUKARA DESOM, MURIYAD VILLAGE P.O,MUKUNDAPURAM TALUK. 4. RADHA, D/O.GOVINDAN & LAKSHMI, POTHIKKARA HOUSE, PARAKKATTUKARA DESOM, MURIYAD VILLAGE P.O,MUKUNDAPURAM TALUK. 5. UNNIMON, S/O.GOVINDAN & LAKSHMI, POTHIKKARA HOUSE, PARAKKATTUKARA DESOM, MURIYAD VILLAGE P.O,MUKUNDAPURAM TALUK. 6. OMANA, D/O.GOVINDAN & LAKSHMI, POTHIKKARA HOUSE, PARAKKATTUKARA DESOM, MURIYAD VILLAGE P.O,MUKUNDAPURAM TALUK. 7. MOHANAN, S/O.GOVINDAN & LAKSHMI, POTHIKKARA HOUSE, PARAKKATTUKARA DESOM, MURIYAD VILLAGE P.O,MUKUNDAPURAM TALUK. BY ADV. MR.V.BINOY RAM RESPONDENT(S): RESPONDENTS: ---------------------------------------------------- 1. SATHYAN.V.K., S/O.KUMARAN, VAYALIKKADA HOUSE, PERAMBRA P.O.,THRISSUR DISTRICT. 2. THE ORIENTAL INSURANCE CO.LTD., BRANCH OFFICE, CITY HEIGHTS BUILDING, SOUTH JUNCTION, CHALAKUDY. R1 BY ADVS. MR.P.G.SURESH, MR.C.V.MANUVILSAN, R2 BY ADV.MR.VPK.PANICKER THIS MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS APPEAL HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 03/03/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: Kss M.N. KRISHNAN, J. ........................................... M.A.C.A.No.2208 OF 2009 ............................................. Dated this the 3rd day of March , 2010. J U D G M E N T This appeal is preferred against the award of the Claims Tribunal, Irinjalakkuda in O.P.(MV)No.434/2002. It is an appeal preferred against the amended award. 2. Originally I am informed that there was an award passed against the insurance company and subsequently when an amendment application was filed, it was allowed and company was exonerated. I am afraid that the basic findings cannot be corrected by the mode of amendment of the award or judgment. None of the provisions of the Civil Procedure Code also enables such a drastic amendment to be done. If an omission has been committed by the tribunal, certainly it can be suo motu reopened or on a review application, after hearing all concerned, necessary orders can be passed. So the methodology adopted by the tribunal is not proper and I am informed that the parties had not been given opportunity to put forward their contentions in the amendment application. Therefore the matter requires reconsideration at the hands of the tribunal. Since there is a : 2 : M.A.C.A.No.2208 OF 2009 prayer for enhanced compensation, let that also be considered as the matter requires reconsideration. 3. Therefore the award under challenge is set aside and the matter is remitted back to the tribunal for a fresh consideration on the quantum as well as the liability of the parties and for the said purpose, let all the parties be permitted to produce documentary as well as oral evidence in support of their respective contentions and then dispose of the matter in accordance with law. Parties are directed to appear before the tribunal on 5.4.2010. Disposed of accordingly. M.N. KRISHNAN, JUDGE cl : 3 : M.A.C.A.No.2208 OF 2009