IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE A.K.BASHEER & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.Q.BARKATH ALI MONDAY, THE 13TH SEPTEMBER 2010 / 22ND BHADRA 1932 MACA.No. 2094 of 2005 --------------------------------------- OPMV.493/2001 of MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS TRIBUNAL, MUVATTUPUZHA .................... APPELLANT(S): APPELLANTS/PETITIONER IN THE O.P(MV): ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- SUNNY GEORGE, AGED 44, S/O. GEORGE, THACHILEDATHU HOUSE, MANJALLOOR KARA, MANJALLOOR VILLAGE, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.M.V.SABU RESPONDENT(S): RESPONDENTS IN O.P(MV)NO.493/01: ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ 1. GEORGE @ JAMES, S/O. ULAHANNAN PATHROSE, KOCHUKUDIYIL HOUSE, MANJALLOOR KARA, MANJALLOOR VILLAGE, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT. 2. JOLLY, S/O. SKARIA, THACHILEDATHU HOUSE, KALLOORKADU KARA, MANJALLOOR VILLAGE, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT. 3. THE ORIENTAL INSURANCE COMPANY LIMITED, KOTHAMANGALAM BRANCH. 4. JOSHY, S/O. SURENDRAN, MANAPARAMBIL HOUSE, PANTHALPADAM DESOM, MELOOR VILLAGE, MELOOR KARA. (Name of the 4th respondent is deleted from the party array at the risk of petitioner as per order dated 28-8-2009 in IA 2220/07) 5. THE MANAGING DIRECTOR, K.S.R.T.C. TRANSPORT BHAVAN, TRIVANDRUM. ADV. SRI.A.R.GEORGE FOR R3 THIS MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS APPEAL HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 13/09/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: A.K.BASHEER & P.Q.BARKATH ALI, JJ. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - M.A.C.A.No.2094 OF 2005 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Dated this the 13th day of September 2010 JUDGMENT Basheer, J. Appellant who allegedly suffered certain injuries in a road traffic accident claimed compensation from respondents 1 to 3 herein. According to the appellant, he was accompanying his goods being carried in the tempo van owned by respondent No.2. The accident occurred because of the rash and negligent driving of the driver of the said tempo van. He claimed a total sum of Rs.2,00,000/- towards compensation. 2. Appellant was examined before the Tribunal as PW1 and Exts.A1 to A10 documents were produced by him in support of his case. Exts.B1 to B4 were marked on the side of the respondents. 3. The Tribunal found that the tempo van was being driven by the appellant himself and not by respondent No.1 as contended by him. But it came on record that respondent No.1 was charge sheeted by the police and he was convicted on his pleading guilty of the charge levelled against him under Sections 279, 337 and 338 IPC. But still, the Tribunal refused to accept the contention of the appellant that it was respondent No.1 who was solely responsible for the accident. In fact respondent No.3/insurance company had also no case that the vehicle was being driven by the appellant. 4. We have carefully perused the impugned award particularly the discussion made by the Tribunal on this point. Having done so, we have no M.A.C.A.No.2094 OF 2005 :: 2 :: hesitation to hold that the Tribunal was not justified in dismissing the claim petition on the ground that he was himself responsible for the accident. 5. Therefore, the impugned award is set aside. The case is remitted to the Tribunal for fresh disposal in accordance with law. It is made clear that it will be open to the parties to adduce further evidence, if they are so advised. The Tribunal shall pass fresh award, as expeditiously as possible, at any rate, within four months from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment. Parties shall appear before the Tribunal on October 15, 2010. A.K.BASHEER, JUDGE P.Q.BARKATH ALI, JUDGE jes