IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE THOTTATHIL B.RADHAKRISHNAN THURSDAY, THE 4TH FEBRUARY 2010 / 15TH MAGHA 1931 WP(C).No. 25223 of 2007(C) -------------------------- OPMV.3710/2001 of MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS TRIBUNAL, KOZHIKODE .................... PETITIONER(S): ------------------------- P.K.HUSSAIN, S/O.LATE AMMED, AGED 42 YEARS, POOTHERKUZHIKKAL HOUSE, PARAPPANPOYIL, THAMARASSERY VIA, KOZHIKODE DISTRICT. BY ADVS. MR.K.M.JAMALUDHEEN, SMT.LATHA PRABHAKARAN. RESPONDENT(S): --------------------------- 1. K.UMMERKUTTY, KALPALLY KUNNUMMAL HOUSE, KALARANTHIRI P.O., CALICUT. 2. UNITED INDIA INSURANCE COMPANY LIMITED, BRANCH OFFICE, VELIMANNA BUILDING, THAMARASSERY, CALICUT. R1 BY ADV.MR.E.NARAYANAN R2 BY ADV.MR.PMM.NAJEEB KHAN THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 04/02/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: Kss WPC.NO.25223/2007 C APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS: P1: COPY OF PETITION I.A.NO.3635/2006 IN OP(MV) 3710/2001 OF THE PRL.MACT, KOZHIKODE. P2: COPY OF THE ORDER IN I.A.NO.3635/06 OF PRL.MACT, KOZHIKODE WRITTEN ON THE BACKSIDE OF EXT.P1. P2(A): COPY OF THE TYPEWRITTEN COPY OF THE EXT.P2. P3: COPY OF THE LIST OF DOCUMENTS DTD. 10/07/2006 SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER IN OP(MV) 3710/01 BEFORE PRL.MACT, KKD. P3(A): COPY OF THE ACCIDENT-CUM-WOUND CERTIFICATE DTD. 4/11/2001. P3(B): COPY OF THE C.T.SCAN REPORT DTD. 4/11/2001. RESPONDENT'S EXHIBITS: N I L /TRUE COPY/ P.S.TO JUDGE Kss THOTTATHIL B.RADHAKRISHNAN, J. = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = W.P.(C).No.25223 of 2007-C = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = Dated this the 4th day of February, 2010. Judgment The petitioner made Ext.P1 application in relation to a claim petition filed by him before the MACT. His request was to summon the documents in connection with his treatment in the Medical College Hospital, Kozhikode. It appears that there is controversy as to whether the entries in the accident-cum-would certificate are complete or whether there were other injuries which were later diagnosed and treated. Under such circumstances, the impugned order refusing to summon the documents is unsustainable and will result in miscarriage of justice. This writ petition is hence allowed quashing the impugned order. The Tribunal will take up Ext.P1 application and call for the documents as sought for by the petitioner and will do the needful following this judgment, in accordance with law. THOTTATHIL B.RADHAKRISHNAN, JUDGE. Sha/0203