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 4TH FEBRUARY 2011 / 15TH MAGHA 1932 MACA.No. 1090 of 2005() ----------------------- OPMV.1382/2000 of MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS TRIBUNAL, MUVATTUPUZHA .................... APPELLANT/PETITIONER ---------------------------------- UNNIKRISHNAN, S/O.NANAPPAN NAIR, MANAKKATTU HOUSE, MAMMURY KARA, MAMMURY VILLAGE. BY ADV. SRI.P.P.JACOB RESPONDENTS/RESPONDENTS --------------- 1. SANAL.B.MENON, THATTARASSERIL HOUSE, KAKKOOR KARA, THIRUMARADY VILLAGE. 2. ANILKUMAR.A., MAMBILAYIL HOUSE, MANJAPRA P.O., ANGAMALI. 3. M/S. THE NATIONAL INSURANCE CO.LTD., BRANCH OFFICE, KOLENCHERRY, P.B.NO.6. ADV. SRI.LAL GEORGE FOR R3 THIS MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS APPEAL HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 04/02/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: A.K.BASHEER & P.Q.BARKATH ALI, JJ. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - M.A.C.A.No. 1090 OF 2005 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Dated this the 4th day of February, 2011 JUDGMENT Barkath Ali, J. Appellant is the claimant in O.P.(MV)No.1382/2000 on the file of Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Muvattupuzha. He challenges the judgment and award of the Tribunal dated February 17, 2005 dismissing the O.P. filed by him for the loss caused to him on account of the injuries sustained by him a motor accident. 2. The accident happened on January 5, 2000 at about 10 A.M.. The claimant went to Sabarimala in a car bearing Reg.No.KL-8/1004 driven by the first respondent. When he returned from the temple and reached near the car, the first respondent negligently drove the vehicle forward and as a result of which the vehicle hit on the left leg of the claimant. Alleging negligence against the driver of the car, the first respondent, the claimant filed the O.P. before the Tribunal under Section 166 (i) (a) of the Act claiming compensation from respondents 1 to 3. 3. Respondents 1 and 2, the driver and the owner of the offending car remained absent before the Tribunal. Respondent No.3, the insurer of the offending car filed a written statement admitting the policy. MACA.No.1090/2005 2 4. Pws 1 to 3 were examined and Exts.A1 to A3 and Ext.X1 were marked on the side of the claimant before the Tribunal. No evidence was adduced by the contesting third respondent. On an appreciation of evidence, the Tribunal found that the claimant has failed to prove the negligence on the part of the first respondent. Hence the claim petition was dismissed by the Tribunal. The claimant has filed this appeal challenging the said finding of the Tribunal . Claimant examined PW1 to PW3 and produced Exts.A1 to A3 and Ext.X1. The Tribunal has chosen to disbelieve their evidence. We have also gone through the evidence of Pws 1 to 3 in detail. We have no reason to come to a different conclusion. The evidence is lacking on the side of the claimant to show that any accident happened as alleged by him. Therefore, the Tribunal is perfectly justified in dismissing the O.P. That being so, we find no merit in this appeal and the same is hereby dismissed. A.K.BASHEER, JUDGE P.Q.BARKATH ALI, JUDGE sv. MACA.No.1090/2005 3 MACA.No.1090/2005 4