IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE J.B.KOSHY & THE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE K.HEMA TUESDAY, THE 19TH FEBRUARY 2008 / 30TH MAGHA 1929 MACA.No. 22 of 2003(B) ---------------------------------- O.P(MV).NO.2414/1994 OF MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS TRIBUNAL, ERNAKULAM. .................... APPELLANT/ PETITIONER: -------------------------------------- P.M.VINAYAKUMAR, AGED 33 YEARS, SRIVALSA BHAVAN, THEKKUMBHAGOM, TRIPUNITHURA. BY ADV. SRI.ABRAHAM JOHN. RESPONDENTS/ RESPONDENTS: ------------------------------------------------ 1. SHAJI MON, S/O.KRISHNAN NAIR, PONTHANGAL HOUSE, MALLIASSERRY P.O POOVARAHI. 2. BABU, S/O.PADMANABHAN, VETTIKKATTU HOUSE, THALAPURAM P.O., MEENACHIL. 3. THE UNITED INDIA INSURANCE CO. LTD., PONKUNNAM. BY ADV. SRI.M.A.HAKIM SHAH, SMT.AYSHA YOUSEFF, SRI.V.K.SIDHIQUE, SRI.SAJITHA SIDHIK. THIS MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS APPEAL HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 19/02/2008,THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: J.B.KOSHY & K.HEMA, JJ. -------------------------------------- M.A.C.A.No.22 OF 2003 ------------------------------------- Dated 19th February, 2008 JUDGMENT Koshy,J . Appellant/claimant who met with an accident applied for compensation contending that he sustained injuries due to the negligence of the second respondent driver of the Jeep, owned by the first respondent and insured by the third respondent insurance company. The vehicle hit him while he was going to temple and then hit against an electric post and as a result, he sustained serious injuries. Second respondent was driving the vehicle in a rash and negligent way. The amount claimed was Rs.2,53,628/=. With regard to the injuries, the appellant produced Ext.A10 wound certificate, Exts.A1 and A2 discharge summaries, Ext.A6 copy of F.I.R, Ext.A7 copy of the charge-sheet issued to the second respondent and Exts.A8 and A9 scene mahazars. In the F.I.R., F.I. Statement, scene mahazars, charge-sheet etc. number of the jeep was mentioned as KL-5A-3933, but, in the claim petition number of the Jeep was mentioned as KL-5A-3944. It is the case of the appellant that the number was mistakenly written in the claim petition due to clerical error. Later, a petition was filed before this court to amend the registration number of the vehicle involved in the accident as KL-5A- 3944. When notice was issued by the Tribunal, owner and driver of the MACA.22/2003 2 vehicle filed vakalath, but, no contention was raised by them that their vehicle was not involved in the accident. However, insurance company raised a contention that number of the vehicle was different. We are of the opinion that Tribunal ought to have considered the evidence in this matter on merits. The injured claimant when filed a petition mistakenly noticed the number, but, the accident is not disputed. In the F.I.R., scene mahazars and other documents produced vehicle number can be ascertained. Provision regarding payment of compensation under the Motor Vehicles Act is a welfare legislation and Tribunal while deciding the case has to bear that fact in mind. Even though frivolous petitions should not be entertained by the Tribunal, it ought to have allowed the appellant to adduce evidence. Whether the mistake happened in the number was only a clerical mistake and whether the vehicle with registration No.KL-5A- 3933 which was involved in the accident was owned by the first respondent and driven by the second respondent etc. should be reconsidered by the Tribunal. If the above vehicle is not owned by the first respondent, no compensation can be realised from the respondents. We are of the opinion that the matter should be reconsidered by the Tribunal in detail and if application is filed to correct the number, that also should be considered by the Tribunal and case should be decided on merits after allowing both parties to MACA.22/2003 3 adduce evidence in this matter. We are not expressing any opinion regarding the merits of the matter. The award is set aside and the matter is remanded for fresh consideration. Parties shall appear before the Tribunal on 7.4.2008. The appeal is allowed by way of remand. J.B.KOSHY JUDGE K.HEMA JUDGE tks