IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE A.K.BASHEER & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.Q.BARKATH ALI FRIDAY, THE 1ST OCTOBER 2010 / 9TH ASWINA 1932 MACA.No. 1923 of 2008(D) ----------------------- OPMV.1645/1992 of MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS TRIBUNAL, ATTINGAL .................... APPELLANT/1ST RESPONDENT:- ---------------------------------------- SHARAFUDEEN, PUTHENKANDIYIL VEEDU, MARUTHIKUNNU, KANDAYIL VEEDU, NAVAIKULAM P.O., THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. BY ADV. SRI.P.M.HABEEB RESPONDENT(S): PETITIONER & RESPONDENTS 2 & 3 --------------- 1. NAJIM, S/O. MUHAMMED HANEEFA, RESIDING AT PADINJATTIN VEEDU, NEAR SALAM MEDICAL STORES, ALUMMOODU, PALLICHAVEETU, PALLIPPURAM VILLAGE., THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 2. FAZILUDEEN, S/O MOHAMMED RASHEED, KOONANCHALIL, MARUTHIKUNNU, NAVAIKULAM. 3. M/S NEW INDIA ASSURANCE COMPANY LTD., NEAR MUNICIPAL BUS STAND, MAIN ROAD, ATTINGAL ADV. SRI.P.K.MUHAMMED FOR R2 THIS MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS APPEAL HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 01/10/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: A.K. BASHEER & P.Q. BARKATH ALI, JJ. ------------------------------------------------------ M.A.C.A. 1923 of 2008 ------------------------------------------------------ Dated: OCTOBER 1, 2010 JUDGMENT Basheer, J. Appellant is stated to be the registered owner of an Ambassador car bearing Regn.No. KRQ 9658. Appellant was arrayed as respondent No.1 in OP(MV)1645/1992 on the file of the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Attingal, a claim petition filed by respondent No.1 herein. 2. The claimant sought compensation for the alleged injury sustained by him in the accident involving the above car, that allegedly occurred on July 14, 1992. But it appears that in the claim petition the number of the vehicle was shown as KRQ 6958. The Tribunal after considering the case of the parties, awarded a sum of Rs.35,000/- to the claimant with 12% interest. The Tribunal held that the appellant and his driver (respondent No.2 herein) were liable to pay the compensation to the claimant since the vehicle referred to in the claim petition was not covered under an insurance policy. 3. The above award was passed by the Tribunal on February 22, 1996. It appears that in the year 2000 the appellant filed a petition for review of the above award contending that his vehicle bearing Regn.No. KRQ 9658 was, in fact, covered under a valid M.A.C.A. 1923 of 2008 2 insurance policy issued by respondent No.3, M/s. New India Assurance Co. Ltd. But the Tribunal dismissed the review petition not only on the ground of delay, but also since, according to the Tribunal, there was no error apparent on the face of the award warranting a review. It is thus that the appellant is before us. 4. Though notice was taken out to respondent No.1/claimant, he refused to accept the same and it was returned as “unclaimed”. Respondent No.3/Insurance Company also has not appeared before this Court even though it was served with notice. 5. It is contended by learned counsel for the appellant that the specific case of the claimant was that he was knocked down by a car. However, the number of the vehicle was mistakenly mentioned as KRQ 6958 in the claim petition. Curiously the same wrong number was mentioned in the police records also. According to the learned counsel the registered owner of the said vehicle (KRQ 6958) is the Executive Engineer, Kallada Irrigation Project Left Bank Division No.5, Quilon and it is, in fact, a goods vehicle. It is further contended by the learned counsel that on verification of the relevant records of the said vehicle, it can be seen that the said vehicle was purchased by the Department in the year 1994. 6. It is the further case of the appellant that the Insurance M.A.C.A. 1923 of 2008 3 Company had, in fact, produced the policy certificate in respect of his vehicle bearing registration No.KRQ 9658. But still the Tribunal refused to place any reliance on the said certificate since the claimant had mentioned the number of the offending vehicle as KRQ 6958. The police records also indicated the number of the offending vehicle as above. 7. The Tribunal held that in the absence of any evidence from the side of the appellant that his vehicle bearing registration No.KRQ 9658 was, in fact, involved in the accident, no reliance can be placed on Ext.B1 certificate. The Tribunal therefore held that the appellant was liable to pay compensation since he did not produce the policy certificate in respect of KRQ 6958 which, according to the claimant, was the offending vehicle. 8. We have carefully perused the records relating to the above case. In fact, on a perusal of Ext.A6 report submitted by the Assistant Motor Vehicles Inspector, it is seen that the registration number of the vehicle involved in the accident is KRQ 9658. Further, the specific case of the claimant was that he was knocked down by a car and not by a goods vehicle. 9. Therefore the impugned award is set aside. The case is remanded to the Tribunal for fresh consideration in accordance with M.A.C.A. 1923 of 2008 4 law. It will be open to the parties to adduce further evidence in the matter, if so advised. The Tribunal shall dispose of the matter as expeditiously as possible, at any rate, within four months from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment. The appellant shall appear before the Tribunal on October 28, 2010. The Registry shall send back the records to the Tribunal forthwith. A.K. BASHEER, JUDGE P.Q. BARKATH ALI, JUDGE mt/-