IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE J.B.KOSHY & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.N.RAVINDRAN MONDAY, THE 23RD JUNE 2008 / 2ND ASHADHA 1930 MFA.No. 217 of 2003(F) ------------------------------ OPMV.2212/1995 of MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS TRIBUNAL, ERNAKULAM .................... APPELLANT/ PETITIONER: ---------------------------------------- DR.B.MADHUSOODANA KURUP, M.SC.PH.D., AGED 47 YEARS, SON OF BALAKRISHNA PILLAI, SANKARALAYAM, NETTOOR SOUTH, N.H.BY-PASS, MARADU P.O. BY ADV. SRI.ANIL S.RAJ SMT.K.N.RAJANI SRI.RADHIKA RAJASEKHARAN P. SMT.NITHYA.K. RESPONDENTS/ RESPONDENTS: ----------------------------------------------- 1. M.R.CHRISTOPHER, S/O. RAPHEAL, MALIAKKAL HOUSE, NETTOOR, MARADU P.O. 2. ANTONY, S/O. MATHEW, UMMATHARA HOUSE, NETTOOR, MARADU P.O. 3. THE UNITED INDIA INSURANCE CO. LTD., HOSPITAL ROAD, COCHIN-11. BY ADV. SRI.PHILIP T.VARGHESE - R2 SRI.THOMAS T.VARGHESE - R2 SRI.M.S.PATTALI - R3 SRI.T.VINOD KUMAR - R3 THIS MISC. FIRST APPEAL HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 23/06/2008,THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: J.B.Koshy & P.N.Ravindran, JJ. ===================== M.F.A.No.217 of 2003 ===================== Dated this the 23rd day of June, 2008. JUDGMENT Koshy,J. The appellant/claimant sustained injuries in a motor accident on 25.6.1995. According to him, while walking along the eastern side of Vyttile - Aroor National Highway road, a scooter bearing registration No.KCT 7473 driven by the second respondent hit at the back of the claimant and sustained injuries. The first respondent is the owner of the scooter insured by the third respondent - Insurance Company. In Ext.A1 F.I.R., it is stated that another vehicle, namely, vehicle No.KL-7B-5628 was also involved in the accident. The claimant himself gave F.I. statement mentioning the above number as the number of the vehicle which him. In the wound certificate also the same number was mentioned. On the basis of this, a charge sheet was also issued to the driver of that vehicle. PW3, the Secretary of the Hospital was also examined to prove the wound certificate. MFA 217/03 -: 2 :- In these circumstances the Tribunal found that the actual offending vehicle involved in the accident was not made a party and hence, the claim was rejected. 2. On going through the evidence on record, we are of the opinion that no grounds are made out by the appellant to take another instance. The appellant is a qualified Doctor and post- graduate and he would not have given an incorrect registration number of the vehicle which hit him. In the above circumstances, since the actual offending vehicle or the Insurance Company of the insured vehicle was not impleaded, the Tribunal rightly rejected the claim petition. Hence, we see no ground to interfere in the matter. The appeal is dismissed. J.B.Koshy, Judge. P.N.Ravindran, Judge. ess 26/6