IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE J.B.KOSHY & THE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE K.HEMA MONDAY, THE 25TH FEBRUARY 2008 / 6TH PHALGUNA 1929 MFA.No. 463 of 2000(B) ---------------------- OPMV.687/1996 of MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS TRIBUNAL, OTTAPALAM .................... APPELLANT: ----------- NARAYANAN, S/O.CHAMI, AGED 39, KATTANADAPPADI, POOLACKAPARAMBIL, THOTTAKKARA POST, OTTAPALAM TALUK, PALAKKAD DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.O.P.NANDAKUMAR SRI.V.A.AJAI KUMAR SRI.K.P.THANGA KOYATHANGAL RESPONDENTS: ------------- 1. RAVI, S/O. CHAMI EZHUTHACHAN, PADICKAPARAMBIL VEEDU, POOLACKAPARAMBIL, THOTTAKKARA POST, OTTAPPALAM TALUK, PALAKKAD DISTRICT. 2. MANIKANDAN, S/O. SANKARANARAYANAN, CHALAMPATTA VEEDU, POST PALAPPURAM, OTTAPALAM TALUK, PALAKKAD DISTRICT. 3. THE UNITED INDIA INSURANCE COMPANY LTD., OTTAPALAM. BY ADV. SRI.G.SREEKUMAR (CHELUR) FOR R3 THIS MISC. FIRST APPEAL HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 25/02/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: J.B. KOSHY & K. HEMA, JJ. ------------------------------------------------ M.F.A. No. 463 2000 ------------------------------------------------ Dated this the 25th February, 2008 JUDGMENT Koshy, J: Appellant/petitioner sustained fracture of right tibia and applied for compensation alleging that the autorickshaw driven by the 1st respondent , owned by the 2nd respondent and insured by the 3rd respondent, caused the accident and he was negligent . The incident occurred on 28-4-1989. Even though the appellant and two other co- passengers in the autorickshaw gave evidence to the effect that the driver of the autorickshaw was negligent, when the 1st respondent was examined, he deposed that no such incident occurred. 2. It is true that after about two months of the accident F.I.R. was registered and police referred the MFA 463/2000 2 matter as a false case. Reference report is marked as Ext.B1. Ext.B3 treatment slip shows that the appellant was admitted on 28-4-1989 at 4.15 PM due to fall from tree and there was smell of alcohol and he was hosterous. According to Ext.X1 investigation report, injuries suffered by the claimant was not as alleged by him. Accident-cum-wound certificate was not produced to show that injuries caused in a motor transport accident. Considering all these circumstances, the Tribunal came to the conclusion that the injuries caused not in a motor accident. The findings of the Tribunal are based on evidence in this case and we see no ground to interfere with the said findings. Hence, the appeal is dismissed. J.B. KOSHY, JUDGE. K. HEMA, JUDGE. Krs. MFA 463/2000 3 MFA 463/2000 4 J.B.KOSHY & K.HEMA,J J. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - MFA 463 of 2000 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - JUDGMENT 25 th February, 2007