IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE M.N.KRISHNAN WEDNESDAY, THE 30TH JUNE 2010 / 9TH ASHADHA 1932 MACA.No. 2722 of 2009(F) ---------------------------- OPMV.435/2002 of ADDL.MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS TRIBUNAL, ALAPPUZHA .................... APPELLANT(S)/PETITIONER: ------------------------------- A.V.MOHANDAS,S/O.VELUKUTTYL ACHARI, CMC 11,CHERTHALA. BY ADV. SRI.T.B.SARASAN RESPONDENT(S)/RESPONDENTS : ---------------------------------------- 1. SAJEED.H,S/O.HASHIM,PUNNATHARA, POOCHAKKAL.PO,CHERTHALA. 2. THE ORIENTAL INSURANCE CO.LTD, REPRESENTED BY ITS BRANCH MANAGER, KOTTAYAM. ADV. SRI.MATHEWS JACOB, SENIOR ADVOCATE FOR R2 SRI.P.JACOB MATHEW FOR R2 THIS MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS APPEAL HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 30/06/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: M.N. KRISHNAN, J. = = = = = = = = = = = = = = M.A.C.A. No. 2722 OF 2009 = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = Dated this the 30th day of June, 2010. J U D G M E N T This appeal is preferred against the award of the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Alappuzha in O.P.(MV)435/02. The claimant, a motorcyclist, sustained injuries in a road accident when it collided with a car on 21.5.01. The Tribunal found both the rider as well as the driver equally negligent and awarded him a compensation of Rs.21,250/- and deducted 50% for the contributory negligence. It is challenging the contributory negligence as well as the quantum the claimant has come up in appeal. The claimant has also challenged the rate of interest. 2. A perusal of the award would reveal that the way in which the Court has dealt with the factum of negligence is far from satisfactory. The Court did not consider the documents produced before it but jumped to the conclusion that “analyzing the back ground and the scene of accident noted in the charge sheet it appears to me that this is a clear M.A.C.A. 2722 OF 2009 -:2:- case of contributory negligence.” What is the scene of accident, how the accident had happened, who was negligent etc. are matters which has to be considered when it is in dispute. The court below, I am told, did not permit the claimant to let in evidence as well. But this is a matter that requires evidence and so I am inclined to set aside the whole award and send it back to the Tribunal for considering the question of negligence, reconsider the question of compensation as well as the rate of interest. Therefore the award under challenge is set aside and the matter is remitted back to the Tribunal with a direction to permit all concerned to produce documentary as well as oral evidence in support of their respective contentions and then dispose of the matter in accordance with law. Parties are directed to appear before the Tribunal on 2.8.2010. M.N. KRISHNAN, JUDGE. ul/-