IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE M.N.KRISHNAN THURSDAY, THE 3RD DECEMBER 2009 / 12TH AGRAHAYANA 1931 MACA.No. 2293 of 2008() ---------------------------------- OPMV.1222/2004 of MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS TRIBUNAL, OTTAPALAM .................... APPELLANT(S): 3RD RESPONDENT ---------------------------- NATIONAL INSURANCE CO.LTD., D.O.BANGALORE, REP. BY THE MANAGER, KOCHI REGIONAL OFFICE, M.G.ROAD, COCHIN - 35. BY ADV. MR.E.M.JOSEPH RESPONDENT(S): CLAIMANT & RESPONDENTS 1, 2 AND 4 ----------------------------- 1. K.O.MATHEW, AGED 55 YEARS, S/O.OUSEPH, 6/247, KAPPALIKUNNEL HOUSE, P.O.SREEKRISHNAPURAM, OTTAPALAM TALUK, PALAKKAD DIST. 2. K.P.MUHAMMED, S/O.K.P.HYDRU, KOLLAPARAMBAN HOUSE, N.S.S.COLLEGE ROAD, MANJERI, MALAPPURAM DIST PIN 676 505. 3. P.SIVASUBRAMANIAN, AGED 42 YEARS, S/O.PALANIANDI, 4TH MILE, KALLINGARA CHERUMULLY VILLAGE, GOODALLOOR, TAMIL NADU. 4. UNITED INDIA INSURANCE CO.LTD., HOSPITAL JN., MANNARKAD. R1 BY ADVS. MR.SANTHEEP ANKARATH R4 BY SMT.RAJI T.BHASKAR THIS MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS APPEAL HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 03/12/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: ORDER ON IA. NOS.2710/2007 & 3507/2009 IN MACA. 2293/2008 DISMISSED 03/12/2009 SD/- M.N.KRISHNAN, JUDGE TRUE COPY P.A. TO JUDGE tss M.N. KRISHNAN, J. ........................................... M.A.C.A.No.2293 OF 2008 ............................................. Dated this the 3rd day of December, 2009 J U D G M E N T This is an appeal preferred by the National Insurance Company, the 3rd respondent in OP(MV)No.1222/2004 of the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Ottapalam. The petition is filed for claiming damages sustained to the vehicle namely a jeep in the road accident. It is the case of the claimant that the jeep owned by him bearing Reg.No.KLL-7412 collided with a bus bearing Reg.No.KL-10-P-7727 resulting in damages to the jeep as well as injuries to persons. The petitioner claimed a compensation of Rs.33,341/-. The insurance company contended that negligence was on the jeep driver and the Tribunal found that the accident took place on account of negligence of the bus driver and awarded a sum of Rs.19,909/=. It is against the finding of negligence, the insurance company of the bus had come up in appeal. 2. Heard the learned counsel for the appellant, claimant as well as the insurance company of the jeep. The learned counsel made available for perusal a copy of the : 2 : M.A.C.A.No.2293 OF 2008 document relating to the accident. I find that in para-8, the Tribunal has arrived at the question of negligence mainly on the basis of the charge sheet and nothing else. A scene mahazer has been prepared by the police. It is marked as Ext.A2 in the case. It is a document produced by the claimant to establish his case. A reading of the scene mahazer would reveal that the road at the place of accident is having a width of 9.50 meters and there is straight vision of three sides of the road. The scene mahazer specifically points out the place of accident as 5 meters south of the northern tar end. The road is having a width of 9.50 meters and therefore, the place of accident is almost on the middle of the road. There is a vision from all sides and if the drivers of both the vehicles had come at a reasonable speed, certainly the accident could have been avoided. This is a head on collision and in such cases, the Hon'ble Supreme Court has taken the view that it is a case of composite negligence of both the drivers. 3. Considering the place of accident which is on the basis of the document produced by the claimant himself, I : 3 : M.A.C.A.No.2293 OF 2008 hold that the accident had taken place on account of the negligence of both the drivers namely the driver of the jeep and the bus and therefore I apportion the negligence at 50%, then the claimant is only entitled to a sum of Rs.9,954/= which I round as Rs.10,000/=. 4. In the result, the appeal is partly allowed and the claimant is awarded a sum of Rs.10,000/= with 8% interest on the said sum from the date of the petition till realisation and a cost of Rs.500/= is directed to deposit by the insurance company. If the amount is already in deposit, only the balance amount need be deposited and if there is any excess deposit, let it be reimbursed to the insurance company on appropriate applications. Disposed of accordingly. M.N. KRISHNAN, JUDGE cl : 4 : M.A.C.A.No.2293 OF 2008