IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE J.B.KOSHY & THE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE K.HEMA TUESDAY, THE 8TH JANUARY 2008 / 18TH POUSHA 1929 MFA.No. 864 of 2002 ----------------------------- OPMV.1186/1995 OF MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS TRIBUNAL, NEYYATTINKARA .................................... APPELLANTS: APPLICANTS --------------------------------------- 1. THANKAM, W/O.CHANDRAN, KOLLAMVILAKAM PUTHEN VEEDU, KARANAMKADU, KOTTAKKAL P.O., PERUMKADAVILA. 2. MINI, D/O.CHANDRAN, RESIDING AT DO.DO. 3. BINU, S/O.CHANDRAN, RESIDING AT DO.DO. 4. SANDHYA, D/O.CHANDRAN, RESIDING AT DO.DO. BY ADV. SRI.R.T.PRADEEP RESPONDENTS/RESPONDENTS --------------------------------------------- 1. K.C.SREEKUMAR, KADAYARAVILAKATHU PUTHEN VEEDU, VENPAKAL P.O. 2. N.PRABHAKARAN, CHARUVILA PUTHEN VEEDU, VENPAKAL, NEYYATTINKARA. 3. GENERAL MANAGER, UNITED INDIA INSURANCE CO. LTD., REGD. HEAD OFFICE-24, WHITE ROAD, MADRAS-600014. R2 & R2 BY ADV. SRI.G.SUDHEER ADV.SRI.MATHEWS JACOB FOR R3 THIS MISC. FIRST APPEAL HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 08/01/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: J.B.KOSHY & K.HEMA,JJ. ----------------------------------------- M.F.A.No.864 OF 2002 ----------------------------------------- Dated this the 8th day of January, 2008 JUDGMENT Koshy, J. Claiming that husband of the first respondent died in a motor accident, his widow and three children filed an application for compenation before the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal. It is the case of the applicants that he sustained fatal injury in an accident which occurred at 9.30 pm on 19.6.1995. PW2 also gave evidence that the accident occurred on 19.6.1995 and after the accident he was taken to Neyyattinkara Government Hospital. After examination by the doctor in the Neyyattinkara hospital, the driver of the offending vehicle (auto rickshaw) and the victim together went to Neyyattinkara police station and from there they went towards north in an auto rickshaw. On the next day the dead body of the victim was found in the varanda of a shop room. PW1 wife of the deceased, who has not seen the incident, deposed that her husband had met with an accident, due to hitting a motorcycle bearing registration number KRU 7123 on him and at the police station Rs.250/- was accepted by him and thereafter she only got information regarding MFA.864/02 2 his death. PW3 is the doctor who issued the wound certificate when he was taken immediately after the alleged accident to the Neyyattinikara Hospital. Exhibit P1 is the wound certificate where two injuries are mentioned. PW3 categorically stated that there are only two injuries when he was taken to the hospital and since the injuries were minor, he was not admitted as an inpatient. Next day at 9.30 he was found dead in the nearby shop. In the postmortem certificate, the following injuries were noticed: “1. Lacerated wound 1.5 x 0.1 cm on the back of head, just to the left of midline and 5 cm above occiput. 2. Abrasion 1 x 1 cm on the prominence of left cheek. 3. Abrasion 1x1 cm on the right side of abdomen 5 cm behind anterior superior aliac spine. 4. Abrasion 8x4 cm on the front and outer aspect of elft knee. 5. Abrasion 1x1 cm on the outer aspect of left ankle. 6. Abrasion 7x3 cm on the front of left elbow. 7. Abrasion 9x5 cm on the back of left elbow. 8. Abrasion 11x4 cm on the back of left wrist and hand. 9. Abrasion 1x1 cm on the back of left forearm 14 cm below elbow. 10.Contusion 4x3x0.5 cm on the left side of forehead 3 cm to the left of midline and 2 cm above eyebrow. MFA.864/02 3 11.Contusion 3x3x0.5 cm on the forehead 3 cm to the right of midline and 2.5 cm above eyebrow.” The claimants, who are the witnesses were not able to explain how the injuries were caused. The wound certificate itself shows that he was having smell of alcohol which shows that even before the alleged accident occurred, he had consumed ethyl alcohol. The additional injuries other than that mentioned in the postmortem certificate shows that he has suffered injuries after the above alleged accident in the night and there is no evidence how he suffered the additional injuries. Even the first injury is a lacerated wound and such incident is not noticed in the wound certificate. The crime case was also referred. In these circumstances, the Tribunal found that there is no evidence to show that the additional injuries other than those covered by Exhibit B1 wound certificate are sustained by the victim only after the accident and that the death is the result of those injuries sustained after the accident and the consummation of ethyl alcohol and there is no reason or evidence to connect the death with the injuries sustained in the accident that occurred on the previous day and we fully agree with the same as the available evidence. We see no reason to interfere with the award passed. The appeal is dismissed. J.B.KOSHY, JUDGE K.HEMA, JUDGE vgs. MFA.864/02 4 J.B.KOSHY & K.HEMA, JJ. ------------------------------ M.F.A.No.864 of 2002 ------------------------------ JUDGMENT .1.2008