IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE M.N.KRISHNAN FRIDAY, THE 29TH AUGUST 2008 / 7TH BHADRA 1930 MACA.No. 707 of 2005() ---------------------- OPMV.201/2000 of MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS TRIBUNAL, MANJERI .................... APPELLANT/3RD RESPONDENT: ------------------------------------------ UNITED INDIA INSURANCE COMPANY LTD., REPRESENTED BY ITS MANAGER, THIRD PARTY CELL, VETUKATTIL BUILDINGS, KOCHI-16. BY ADV. SRI.P.R.RAMACHANDRA MENON RESPONDENTS: PETITIONER & RESPONDENTS 1 & 2 RESPECTIVELY: --------------------------------------------------------- 1. SUNEER BABU A., AGED 20 YEARS, S/O. ALUNGAL SAIDALAVI, ALUNGAL HOUSE, VELLIYENCHERI P.O. 2. RAJAN PULLAYIL, S/O. YANKUTTY, PULLIYIL HOUSE, VETTATHOOR P.O. 3. PATHUMMA, W/O. MOHAMMED, ANANGADAN HOUSE, KARKIDAMKUNNU P.O. BY ADV. SRI.BABU S. NAIR FOR R1 THIS MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS APPEAL HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 29/08/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: MACA No. 707/05 ORDER ON IA No. 1494/05 IN MACA No.707/05 DISMISSED 29.8.08 SD/- M.N.KRISHNAN, JUDGE /TRUE COPY/ PA TO JUDGE. M.N.KRISHNAN, J. -------------------------- M.A.C.A. No. 707 OF 2005 --------------------- Dated this the 29th day of August, 2008 JUDGMENT This appeal is preferred against the award passed by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Manjeri, in OP(MV) 201/00. The claimant sustained injuries in a road accident and the Tribunal found the driver negligent and awarded a compensation of Rs.73,650/-. It is against that decision, the Insurance Company has come up in appeal. 2. Insurance Company has obtained permission under section 170 of the Motor Vehicles Act. I am pained to see the manner in which the question of negligence has been found by the Tribunal. The Tribunal finds that Ext.A1 crime registered against the driver of the mini lorry, stands unchallenged and undisputed and therefore as there is no contra evidence, the issue is answered in favour of the petitioner. The very same Tribunal has marked Ext.B1, a copy of the judgment in the criminal case. It is a fact the Tribunal without considering that document at all had entered into a finding of negligence on the basis of FIR. This approach cannot be accepted. There is a duty cast upon the claimant to prove the negligence. He MACA No. 707/05 2 should have produced the scene mahazar or got himself examined as a witness and face the cross examination especially when the certified copy of his deposition was produced before the Tribunal. Therefore, I feel this is a matter which requires interference. The award passed by the Tribunal is set aside and the matter is remitted back to the Tribunal for fresh consideration with liberty to the claimant to get himself examined and produce documents in support of his contention regarding negligence. The Insurance Company is also entitled to adduce evidence in support of its contention and the Tribunal shall dispose of the matter in accordance with law. Parties are directed to appear before the Tribunal on 20.10.08. M.N.KRISHNAN, JUDGE vps MACA No. 707/05 3