IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE A.K.BASHEER & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.Q.BARKATH ALI WEDNESDAY, THE 19TH JANUARY 2011 / 29TH POUSHA 1932 MACA.No. 898 of 2004() ---------------------- OPMV.58/1999 of MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS TRIBUNAL, TRIVANDRUM .................... APPELLANTS/APPLICANTS ----------------------------------- 1. THANKAMMA W/O. LATE THULASI, THUNDUVILA PUTHEN VEEDU, KOVALAM P.O., TRIVANDRUM. 2. AKIL RAJ (MINOR), S/O. LATE THULASI, THUNDUVILA PUTHEN VEEDU, KOVALAM PO., TRIVANDRUM (MINOR 2ND APPELLANT REPRESENTED BY HIS MOTHER THE 1ST APPELLANT) 3. MADHAVI, W/O. SUKUMARAN, THUNDUVILAK PUTHEN VEEDU, KOVALAM P.O., TRIVANDRUM. BY ADV. SRI.NAGARAJ NARAYANAN SRI.SAIJO HASSAN SRI.SABU SREEDHARAN SRI.VIMAL KUMAR.A.V. RESPONDENTS/ RESPONDENTS -------------------------- 1. MAHEEN S/O. SHAHUL HAMED, SHANAVAS MANZIL, T.C.48/438, (NEW T.C.46/66), PALLY THERAVU, POONTHURA P.O., TRIVANDRUM-26. 2. SHAMSUDHEEN, S/O. BADARUDEEN, PUTHUVAL HOUSE, T.C.46/631, BEEMAPALLY, VALLAKKADAVU P.O., TRIVANDRUM-8. THIS MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS APPEAL HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 19/01/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: A.K.BASHEER & P.Q.BARKATH ALI, JJ. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - M.A.C.A.No.898 OF 2004 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Dated this the 19th day of January, 2011 JUDGMENT Barkath Ali, J. Appellants are the claimants in O.P.(MV)No.58/1999 of Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Thiruvananthapuram. They are the wife, minor son and the mother of deceased Thulasi who died in a motor accident. The claimants filed the O.P. before the Tribunal claiming a compensation of Rs. 5,00,000/- for the loss caused to them on account of the death of deceased in the accident. The Tribunal dismissed the O.P. The claimants have now come up in appeal challenging the said judgment of the Tribunal. 2. Deceased Thulasi was aged 36 and was a loading and unloading worker earning Rs. 3,000/- per month. The case of the claimants as revealed from the O.P. and as testified by PW1, the first claimant before the Tribunal is that on April 2, 1999 at about 11.30 a.m., while he was walking along Thiruvallom - Kovalam road, he was knocked down by the motor cycle bearing Reg.No.KBT 1205 causing MACA.No.898/2004 2 serious injuries to him and that he died as a result of the injury sustained on June 23, 1995 while undergoing treatment in the hospital. Claimants filed the O.P. before the Tribunal alleging negligence against the second respondent, the rider of the offending motor cycle. 3. The first respondent, the owner of the offending motor cycle though entered appearance before the Tribunal did not file any written statement before the Tribunal. The second respondent, the rider of the offending motor cycle remained absent before the Tribunal. The third respondent, the insurer of the offending motor cycle filed a written statement admitting the policy, but disputed the accident. 4. Pws 1 and 2 were examined , Exts.A1 to A3 and Ext.X1 to X3 were marked on the side of the claimants. On an appreciation of evidence, the Tribunal found that the claimants failed to prove that deceased died as a result of the injury sustained in the accident and dismissed the O.P. The claimants have now come up in appeal challenging the said finding of the Tribunal. 5. Heard the counsel for the claimants and the counsel for the Insurance Company. MACA.No.898/2004 3 6. The following points arise for consideration : 1. Whether any accident happened as alleged by the claimants on April 2, 1999. 2. Whether the deceased died as a result of the injury sustained in the accident ? 3. Whether the claimants are entitled to any compensation. If so, what is the quantum ? 7. The specific case of the claimants is that while the deceased was walking along Thiruvallom - Kovalam road and reached at Thiruvallom junction, he was knocked down by the motor cycle bearing Reg.No.KBT 1205 on April 21, 1995 at 11.30 p.m. and that he died as the result of the injury sustained in the accident on June 23, 1995. The fact that he met with such an accident is not seriously disputed which is also proved by Ext.A1 copy of the police charge. Ext.A2, the certificate issued from Al-Arif Hospital shows that when the CT scan was taken, it was found to be within normal limits and he was discharged on April 5, 1995 as he sustained no injury. He was admitted in Medical College Hospital as seen from Ext.X1 on June 15, 1995 for subdural haematoma, renal failure and metabolic MACA.No.898/2004 4 encephalopathy from where he died on June 23, 1995. In Ext.A2 no injury was noted on the head. It is clear from the above that deceased did not sustain any fatal injuries which led to his death. We therefore confirm the above finding of the Tribunal on this point. It follows that the claimants are not entitled to any compensation from the respondents. That being so, we find no merit in the appeal and the same is hereby dismissed. A.K.BASHEER, JUDGE P.Q.BARKATH ALI, JUDGE sv. MACA.No.898/2004 5