IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE M.N.KRISHNAN THURSDAY, THE 24TH JULY 2008 / 2ND SRAVANA 1930 M.A.C.A. No. 1652 of 2005(C) ----------------------- OP(MV)NO.359/2001 OF ADDL. MOTOR ACCIDENTS CLAIMS TRIBUNAL / (ADDL. DISTRICT JUDGE),THALASSERY. .................... APPELLANT/PETITIONER: ----------------------- VARGHESE, S/O. THANKACHAN, PARAKKAL HUSE, P.O. KARUVARUMKUNDU, NILAMBUR. BY ADV. SRI.GRASHIOUS KURIAKOSE SRI.PREM DOMINIC RESPONDENTS/RESPONDENTS: ------------------------- 1. RAMAKRISHNAN, S/O. KUNHIRAMAN, VADAKKE PARAMBIL HOUSE, P.O. EDAYAR, KANNAVAM, KUTHUPARAMBA. 2. M.M. GEORGE, S/O. JOSEPH, MANAGING PARTNER, HOLLY FAMILY STONE CRUSHER, EDAYAR, KANNAVAM, KUTHUPARAMBA. 3. UNITED INDIA INSURANCE CO. LTD., THALASSERY. BY ADV. SRI.M.RAMESH CHANDER - R1 & R2 SRI.M.S.PATTALI - R3 SRI.K.J.KURIACHAN - R3 THIS MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS APPEAL HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 24/07/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: M.N.KRISHNAN, J. -------------------------- M.A.C.A. No. 1652 OF 2005 --------------------- Dated this the 24th day of July, 2008 JUDGMENT This appeal is preferred against the award passed by the Addl. Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Thalassery, in OP(MV) 359/01. It is the case of the claimant that while he was travelling in a bus bearing registration No.KL-13A/5635, it met with an accident with a lorry bearing registration No. KL-13B/6366. A perusal of the written statement would reveal that there has been no dispute with respect to the accident. But, unfortunately, the Tribunal noted that in para 15 of the petition, the number of the lorry is given as the number of the bus. Therefore, the Tribunal felt that the claimant has no idea about the accident at all and therefore, dismissed the application. 2. I feel the Tribunal has been very technical and if really the claimant had sustained injuries which is not disputed by any of the parties, the mistake committed by the client or lawyer should not have been taken as a serious ground to dismiss the claim petition itself. Therefore, it is desirable that an opportunity is given to the claimant and, if necessary, to correct the para 15 of the petition and MACA No.1652/05 2 then adduce sufficient evidence to establish that he was involved in the accident and that has resulted in sustainment of injuries. Therefore, the award under challenge is set aside and the matter is remitted back to the Tribunal for fresh consideration. Parties are permitted to adduce documentary as well as oral evidence in support of their respective contentions and the Tribunal is directed to dispose of the matter in accordance with law and not to do it in a hyper technical manner. Parties are directed to appear before the Tribunal on 29.8.08. M.N.KRISHNAN, JUDGE vps MACA No.1652/05 3