IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE M.N.KRISHNAN WEDNESDAY, THE 11TH JUNE 2008 / 21ST JYAISHTA 1930 MACA.No. 1944 of 2005() ----------------------- OPMV.830/2000 of MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS TRIBUNAL, PERUMBAVOOR .................... APPELLANT/PETITIONER IN OP(MV) ----------------------------------------------- T.O.DEVASY, AGED 51, S/O.OUSEPH, THANIKKA PARAMBIL HOUSE(ARUN NIVAS), NEELISWARAM KARA, KALADY VILLAGE. BY ADV. SRI.V.K.GOPALAKRISHNA PILLAI SRI.GOPAKUMAR.G. RESPONDENTS: RESPONDENTS IN OIP(MV) ----------------------------------- 1. JOSE T.D., S/O.DEVASSY, THANETHAN HOUSE, MANIKYAMANGALAM VILLAGE. 2. REETHA JOSE, W/O.JOSE, MANAVALAN HOUSE, KOTTAMAM KARA, NEELISWARAM, KALADY VILLAGE. 3. THE ORIENTAL INSURANCE CO LTD., DIVISIONAL OFFICE, RUKIYA BAGH, 2ND FLOOR, M.G.ROAD, RAVIPURAM, KOCHI. BY ADV. DR.ELIZABETH VARKEY FOR R3 THIS MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS APPEAL HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 11/06/2008, ALONG WITH M.A.C.A.NO.1973/2005, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: M.N.KRISHNAN, J. ---------------------------------------------- M.A.C.A Nos.1944 & 1973 of 2005 ---------------------------------------------- Dated 11th June, 2008. J U D G M E N T C.M.Appln.Nos.2736/05 in MACA 1944/05 & 2789/05 in MACA 1973/05 : For the reasons stated in the accompanying affidavits, I find that there is sufficient cause for condoning the delay. Accordingly, the applications are allowed. These appeals are preferred against the common award of the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Perumbavoor in O.P.(MV) No.830/2000 and 1594/1999 respectively. The Tribunal held that the claimants have not succeeded in proving that they were travelling in the bus which got involved in the accident and therefore, dismissed the petitions. 2. Learned counsel for the claimants would submit that the approach of the Tribunal has been technical and really the claimants were travelling in the bus. That fact has been spoken to by one of the witnesses. It is also submitted that if an opportunity is given, he will be able to satisfy the conscience of the court regarding the genuineness. If actually these persons also had travelled in the bus when the accident took place, I do not want to defeat their real interest. When a bus accident takes MACA Nos.1944 & 1973/05 2 place and a large number of persons are involved resulting in injuries to them and when wound certificates and other certificates are prepared, there is every likelihood of some omission and that shall not be a ground to reject the claim, if really they are involved. The matter has to be looked into in that angle as well, and if the court is satisfied that there is some truth in what the claimants say, then it is for the court to decide the issue. Therefore, I set aside the award passed by the Tribunal and remit the case back to the Tribunal with liberty to the claimants to adduce both documentary and oral evidence in support of their respective contentions. Needless to say that the respondents are also free to adduce evidence in support of their respective contentions, and the court shall decide the matter after hearing all the concerned parties. The parties shall appear before the Tribunal on 23.7.2008. M.N.KRISHNAN, JUDGE. tgs M.N.KRISHNAN, J. ---------------------------------------------- M.A.C.A. Nos.1944 & 1973 of 2005 ---------------------------------------------- J U D G M E N T Dated 11th June, 2008.