IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE A.K.BASHEER & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.Q.BARKATH ALI TUESDAY, THE 28TH JUNE 2011 / 7TH ASHADHA 1933 MACA.No. 1036 of 2005() ----------------------- OPMV.1342/2001 of MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS TRIBUNAL, MUVATTUPUZHA .................... APPELLANT/PETITIONER ---------------------------------- ELDHOSE, S/O.JOSE, THATTARATHU HOUSE, KOOTHATTUKULAM P.O. BY ADV. SRI.MATHEW JOHN (K) SRI.SUJESH MENON V.B. RESPONDENTS/RESPONDENTS --------------- 1. K.A.GEORGE, S/O.AUGUSTY, KANNANCHIRA HOUSE, PUNNACKAL POST, THIRUVAMBADY. 2. JINESH GEORGE, KANNANCHIRA HOUSE, PUNNACKAL P.O., THIRUVAMBADY. 3. THE UNITED INDIA INSURANCE CO. LTD., THIRUVAMBADY P.O. ADV. SMT.P.K.SANTHAMMA FOR R3 THIS MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS APPEAL HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 28/06/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: A.K.BASHEER & P.Q.BARKATH ALI, JJ. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - M.A.C.A.No.1036 OF 2005 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Dated this the 28th day of June, 2011 JUDGMENT Barkath Ali, J. Appellant is the claimant in O.P.(MV)No.1342/2001 on the file of Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Muvattupuzha. In this appeal, he challenges the judgment and award of the Tribunal dismissing his O.P. claiming compensation for the loss caused to him on account of the injuries sustained by him in a motor accident. 2. The case of the appellant/claimant was that on May 19, 2001 while he was about to board the jeep bearing Reg.No.Kl-11/F 9087 from its rear side, the jeep moved back and hit a coconut tree and that claimant was crushed between the jeep and coconut tree causing serious injuries to his right leg. Alleging negligence against the second respondent, driver of the offending jeep,the claimant filed the O.P. before the Tribunal claiming a compensation of Rs. 65,500/-. 3. Respondents 1 and 2, the owner and the driver of the offending jeep filed a written statement denying the liability. The third respondent, the insurer of the offending jeep filed a written statement MACA.No.1036/2005 2 admitting the policy, but denied the liability. 4. PWs 1 and 2 were examined and Exts.A1 to 10 were marked by the claimant before the Tribunal. Ext.B1 was marked by the respondents. The Tribunal on an appreciation of evidence found that the claimant has failed to prove that any accident occurred as alleged by him or he sustained any injuries in the said accident and dismissed the O.P. The claimant has now come up in appeal challenging the said judgment and award of the Tribunal. 4. Heard the counsel for the appellant/claimant and the counsel for the Insurance Company. 5. The following point arises for consideration : Whether the finding of the Tribunal that the claimant has failed to prove that he has sustained any injuries in the accident as alleged by him and consequently dismissing the O.P. can be sustained. 6. Counsel for the appellant/claimant argued that the police has charged the case against the second respondent and in that criminal case, he appeared before the Magistrate and pleaded guilty as evidenced by Ext.A5 copy of the police charge in C.C.463/2001 on the MACA.No.1036/2005 3 file of Judicial Magistrate of First Class II, Thamarassery and Ext.A6 copy of the judgment dated October 31, 2001 therein and that therefore the Tribunal is not justified in holding that no such accident happened as alleged by the claimant. 7. For several reasons, we are inclined to confirm the finding of the Tribunal that the claimant has failed to prove that any accident occurred as alleged by him or he sustained any injuries in that accident. Claimant examined PWs 1 and 2 and produced Exts.A1 to A10. PW1 is the claimant and PW2 is the alleged occurrence witness. 8. We have gone through the evidence of PWs 1 and 2 and the award of the Tribunal. The Tribunal has given convincing and cogent reasons for disbelieving the evidence of PWs 1 and 2 regarding the accident. We find no reason to come to a different conclusion. 9. Further, the accident occurred on May 19, 2001. The FIR was registered only on June 22, 2001, that too in pursuance of a complaint sent by the claimant by post as seen from Ext.A1 copy of the FIR. The Motor Vehicle Inspector who inspected the offending vehicle found no damage to the same as evidenced by Ext.A4 copy of the MACA.No.1036/2005 4 inspection report. 10. In Ext.A7, copy of the clinical note issued from Kozhikode District Co-operative Hospital, nothing is mentioned about the occurrence of any motor accident. If there was such an accident as alleged by the claimant, he would have mentioned the same to the doctor therein. and it would have found a place in Ext.A7. For all these reasons, confirming the finding of the Tribunal, we hold that the claimant has failed to prove that any accident happened involving any motor vehicle as alleged by him or he sustained any injuries in that accident. 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.1036/2005 5 MACA.No.1036/2005 6 MACA.No.1036/2005 7