IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE M.N.KRISHNAN THURSDAY, THE 20TH NOVEMBER 2008 / 29TH KARTHIKA 1930 MACA.No. 291 of 2006(G) ------------------------------ OPMV.410/1994 of MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS TRIBUNAL, PATHANAMTHITTA .................... APPELLANT(S): /CLAIMANT -------------------------------- P.Y.SUNNY, S/O.YOHANNAN, PATHALIL VEEDU, KANNANPURA, PATHANAMTHITTA. BY ADV. SRI.S.SANTOSH KUMAR (PERUNAD) RESPONDENT(S)/RESPONDENT: ----------------------------------- 1. I.M.HASSANKARI RAWTHER, VALLIVILAYIL HOUSE, ATHIKATTUKULANGARA, NOORANADU. 2. P.M.JAMAL KUTTY, PUNNAMOOTTIL, PAZHAVANGADI, RANNY. 3. NEW INDIA INSURANCE CO. LTD., KAYAMKULAM. ADV. SRI.THOMAS MATHEW NELLIMOOTTIL FOR R3 THIS MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS APPEAL HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 20/11/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: M.N. KRISHNAN, J. = = = = = = = = = = = = = = M.A.C.A. NO. 291 OF 2006 = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = Dated this the 20th day of November, 2008. J U D G M E N T This appeal is preferred against the award of the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Pathanamthitta in O.P.(MV) 410/94. The claimant is the owner of a motorcycle and the claim petition is filed for realisation of damages caused on account of a hit on the motorcycle in an accident by a bus bearing Reg.No.KRA/8616. The Tribunal found that the accident had taken place on account of the negligence of the bus driver but dismissed the claim application on the ground that no evidence is produced to prove the damages sustained. One of the documents namely Ext.A5 is a letter dated 10.4.94 which would indicate that Rs.20,630/- is received as cost of materials purchased. The Tribunal observed that if that document is accepted it will appear that the vehicle had been repaired without any repairing charges. The Tribunal suspected that the bills could have been utilized for claiming compensation from its own insurance company M.A.C.A. 291 OF 2006 -:2:- for own property damages. I cannot find fault with the Tribunal in dismissing the claim. Learned counsel for the appellant would strongly contend before me that his client has been successful in tracing out last bills and that appears to be the ground in the application to condone the delay. Therefore if there are bills and it can stand the scrutiny of law then, certainly the matter can be reconsidered by the Tribunal. 2. Learned counsel for the insurance company would contend there is inordinate delay and no chance need be given. Admittedly his motorcycle had been damaged on account of an accident. It is further clear that he had sold the vehicle and he would have incurred expenses for the repair of the same. So I feel in the interest of justice an opportunity can be given. Therefore the award under challenge is set aside and the matter is remitted back to the Tribunal and the parties are permitted to adduce both documentary as well as oral evidence in support of their respective contentions and then the matter be disposed of in M.A.C.A. 291 OF 2006 -:3:- accordance with law. Even if the claimant ultimately succeeds, I make it clear that he may not be entitled to interest from 2.4.04 to 19.1.06, i.e., till the date of filing of the appeal. Parties are directed to appear before the Tribunal on 29.12.08. The MACA is disposed of accordingly. M.N. KRISHNAN, JUDGE. ul/-