IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE M.N.KRISHNAN TUESDAY, THE 15TH JULY 2008 / 24TH ASHADHA 1930 MACA.No. 659 of 2007() -------------------------------- OPMV.691/2001 of MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS TRIBUNAL, KOZHIKODE .................... APPELLANT/PETITIONER IN THE OP(MV) --------------------------------------------------------- PRABHAKARA KURUP, S/O.UNNIKRISHNAN NAIR, AGED.60 YEARS, PRAJEESH NIVAS, NAROPILAKKAL, THAZHEKKAD AMSOM, KACHERI DESOM, MUPPATTA MUKKOM, KOZHIKODE. BY ADV. SRI.K.M.JAMALUDHEEN SMT.LATHA PRABHAKARAN RESPONDENTS/RESPONDENTS IN THE OP(MV) -------------------------------------------------------------------- 1. PAZHANGAL ALIKUTTY, P.A.M.MANZIL, ERANHIMAVU, PANNIKODE, MUKKOM VIA, KOZHIKODE. 2. K.P.JOY, S/O.PATHROSE, KAPPLAMKUZHIYIL, ERUMAMUNDA, NILAMBUR. 3. THE UNITED INDIA INSURANCE CO.LTD., BRANCH OFFICE, VELIMANNA BUILDING, THAMARASSERY, KOZHIKODE. BY ADV. SRI.PMM.NAJEEB KHAN - R3 SMT.P.K.SANTHAMMA - R3 THIS MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS APPEAL HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 15/07/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: M.N.KRISHNAN, J ===================== MACA No.659 OF 2007 ===================== Dated this the 15th day of July 2008 JUDGMENT This appeal is preferred against the award of the Principal Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Kozhikode in O.P.(MV)No.691 of 200. The case of the claimant is that while he was riding a motor bike due to the negligence of the tractor driver there was a collision between the two which resulted in sustainment of injuries to him. As per the first information statement the petitioner was riding the motor cycle at the relevant time and that Mukundan Master was the pillion rider. But the learned counsel would submit before me that by mistake in the claim petition he has been described as a pillion rider instead of a driver. He had attributed negligence only on the opposite vehicle. Therefore the question of changing may not decide the issue. But it is true that such when inconsistent or mistaken pleadings are there the party should have gone into the box, give evidence and produce satisfactory evidence before the Tribunal to establish that such an accident had taken place. I do not want to discuss further . I feel an opportunity can be given. MACA 659/2007 -:2:- Therefore the award under challenge is set aside and the matter is remitted back to the Tribunal for fresh consideration after affording equal opportunity to all concerned to produce both documentary as well as oral evidence in support of their respective contentions. Parties are directed to appear before the Tribunal on 22.8.2008. MACA is disposed of as above. M.N.KRISHNAN, JUDGE Cdp/-