IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE A.K.BASHEER & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.Q.BARKATH ALI MONDAY, THE 8TH MARCH 2010 / 17TH PHALGUNA 1931 MACA.No. 1362 of 2005() ----------------------- OPMV.980/1992 of MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS TRIBUNAL, THRISSUR .................... APPELLANT/PETITIONER: ------------------- MITTU JOHN, AGED 18 YEARS, D/O. JOHN, OLLUKKARAN HOUSE, MISSION QUARTERS, THRISSUR. BY ADV. SRI.RAJIT SRI.RANJIT BABU RESPONDENTS/ RESPONDENTS: --------------------------- 1. ANTO, S/O. PORINCHU, PALLIPURATHUKARAN HOUSE, NELLIKUNNU, OLLUKKARA, THRISSUR. 2. C.J. JOSE, S/O. JACOB, CHITTILAPPILLY HOUSE, P.O. CHITTILAPPILLY,THRISSUR 3. UNITED INDIA INSURANCE CO. LTD., THRISSUR BRANCH, THRISSUR. ADV. SRI.C.V.BIMAL ROY FOR R3 THIS MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS APPEAL HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 08/03/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: A.K.BASHEER & P.Q.BARKATH ALI, JJ. --------------------------- C.M.Appln.No.1904 OF 2005 & M.A.C.A.No. 1362 OF 2005 --------------------------- Dated this the 8th day of March, 2010 J U D G M E N T ~~~~~~~~~~~ Basheer, J. The prayer in the application filed under Section 5 of the Limitation Act is to condone the delay of 7 years and 67 days in filing this appeal. 2. The petitioner has filed the appeal along with the delay petition challenging the inadequacy of the quantum of compensation awarded to her. The Tribunal passed the award way back of 3rd February, 1998. A sum of Rs.2,55,500/- was awarded to the petitioner with 10% interest from 20.6.1992 till date of realisation. It is true that the petitioner was aged only 5 at the time of the accident, in which she apparently sustained a grievous injury on her left hand. 3. The case of the petitioner as is discernible from the memorandum of appeal, is that she had to incur heavy medical expenses for treatment on her injured left hand in the year 2005. M.A.C.A.No.1362/2005 2 Large number of bills have been produced today before us along with I.A.No.666/2010 contending that she had to be hospitalised on two or three occasions in the year 2005 to do some corrective surgery and for such other incidental treatments. 4. It may at once be noticed that this appeal was filed before this Court on 11th August, 2005. This has remained in the registry dormant because of some defect. The appellant had not taken any steps to bring it up before the Bench for the last five years. 5. But, when the delay petition is now taken up for consideration, the plea is that this is a most deserving case in which the Court should show leniency, compassion and what not. 6. It may be true that the young girl is undergoing the agony of the after-effects of a very unfortunate injury on her left hand. It may yet again be true that she had to meet some recurring expenses for her treatment in 2005, more than 13 years after the accident. But, this Court cannot overlook the fact that the petitioner was also apparently responsible for the delay M.A.C.A.No.1362/2005 3 that has resulted after filing the appeal. Mover over, in many of the accident cases such recurring expenses may have to be met by the victims. The Tribunals are ofcourse empowered to make provision for future medical expenses in appropriate cases, if sufficient proof is produced before it while passing the award. But once the award is passed the matter ends there. It cannot be sought to be reopened after such a long lapse of time in an appeal that is filed with inordinate delay. 7. We do not think that this is a fit case in which the petitioner should be given liberty to reopen the case on the plea that she had to bear additional expenses for treatment in connection with the accident which took place more than 18 years ago. We do not find any reason to condone the inordinate delay of more than 7 years in filing the appeal. Therefore, the delay petition is dismissed. Consequently the appeal is also dismissed. (A.K.BASHEER, JUDGE) (P.Q.BARKATH ALI, JUDGE) ps