IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE A.K.BASHEER & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.Q.BARKATH ALI WEDNESDAY, THE 9TH JUNE 2010 / 19TH JYAISTHA 1932 MACA.No. 671 of 2004() ---------------------- OPMV.460/1999 of ADDL.MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS TRIBUNAL, THALASSERY .................... APPELLANT(S): APPELLANT/PETITIONER ---------------------------------- R.P.RAMESHAN NAMBOODIRI, S/O. PURUSHOTHAMAN NAMBOODIRI, AGED 39 YEARS, PARELLAL COLLEGE LECTURER, RESIDING AT KUNNIRIKKA AKATHUTT ILLAM, P.O.PATHIRIYAD, VIA PINARAYI, KANNUR DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.GRASHIOUS KURIAKOSE RESPONDENT(S): RESPONDENTS -------------------------- 1. V.P.MOHANAN S/O. GOPALAN NAMBIAR, VADAKKEPARAMBATH VEEDU, THRIPPANGOTTUR AMSOM, CHETTAKANDAY, KANNUR DISTRICT. 2. P.C.UMESH S/O. KUNHIRAMAN, MEETHALE KOMATH, ERANHOLI, THALASSERY. 3. UNITED INDIA INSURANCE CO.LTD., THALASSERY. 4. M.V.PAVITHRAN, S/O. T.KRISHNAN NAIR, SREEPA NIVAS, SANKARANELLUR P.O., KANNUR DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.SERGI JOSEPH THOMAS FOR R4 BY ADV.SRI.R.S.KALKURA FOR R3 THIS MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS APPEAL HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 09/06/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: A.K.BASHEER & P.Q.BARKATH ALI, JJ. ------------------------------- M.A.C.A.No.671 of 2004 ------------------------------- Dated this the 9th day of June, 2010 J U D G M E N T Basheer,J. Appellant who allegedly sustained certain injuries in a road traffic accident claimed a sum of Rs.1,25,000/- as compensation from the owner, driver and insurer of the offending vehicle. According to the appellant, a bus bearing Registration No.KRC.8559 which belonged to Respondent No.2, had knocked him down while he was walking along the side of the road near New Bus Stand, Thalassery, at about 8 a.m. on October 22, 1998. He alleged that the accident occurred only because of the rash and negligent driving of the bus by Respondent No.1. Since the vehicle was insured with Respondent No.3 Insurance Company, the appellant contended that the said respondent was liable to indemnify the owner of the vehicle. 2. The Tribunal, after considering the oral and documentary evidence available on record, came to the M.A.C.A.No.671 of 2004 2 conclusion that the contention of the appellant that he was knocked down by the bus belonging to Respondent No.2 could not be substantiated by him. Accordingly, the claim petition was dismissed by the impugned Award. 3. The Tribunal noticed that in Ext.A2 wound certificate, the Doctor had recorded that the appellant was reportedly knocked down by an auto rickshaw and not by a bus. Though in Ext.A1, First Information Report, the appellant had categorically stated that it was not auto rickshaw that had knocked him down but infact it was a bus, the Tribunal did not place any reliance on the said document. 4. Curiously, the Tribunal has referred to the admission made by the Insurance Company in its statement that the bus bearing Registration No.KRC.8559 was involved in the accident. But still the Tribunal proceeded to hold that the appellant had failed to establish that he was knocked down by the bus belonging to respondent No.2 and driven by Respondent No.1. M.A.C.A.No.671 of 2004 3 5. It is seen mentioned by the learned Judge in the Award that in Ext.A1, First Information Report, the appellant had stated that an auto rickshaw had hit him. But a perusal of the said document will show that the above observation made by the learned Judge is not correct. The appellant had infact clarified that the noting made by the Doctor in Ext.A2 wound certificate was incorrect and that it was infact the bus bearing Registration No.KRC.8559 that had knocked him down. In the course of cross examination of PW.1(appellant), it was not even suggested by the learned counsel for the Insurance Company that it was not the bus referred to above that was involved in the accident. In other words, the Insurance Company did not even make a suggestion that it was an auto rickshaw that had knocked down the appellant. 6. Keeping in view all the above facts and circumstances, we have no hesitation to hold that the finding entered by the Tribunal that the appellant had failed to substantiate his contention that he was knocked down by the M.A.C.A.No.671 of 2004 4 bus bearing Registration No.KRC. 8559 resulting in injuries to him cannot be sustained. Therefore, the impugned Award is set aside. The case is remanded to the Tribunal for fresh disposal in accordance with law. It will be open to the parties to adduce further evidence, if any, before the Tribunal. 7. Parties shall appear before the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Thalassery, on July 14, 2010. Appeal is allowed in the above terms. A.K.BASHEER, JUDGE. P.Q.BARKATH ALI, JUDGE. nj.