IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
MACA.No. 2136 of 2009()
1. DEVADAS,S/O.VASUDEVAN,VALIKULANGARA
... Petitioner
Vs
1. THATTAN THASVIDA MUSTHAFA,
... Respondent
2. C.B.KRISHNAKUMAR,S/O.BALAN NAIR,
3. UNITED INDIA INSURANCE CO.LTD.,
For Petitioner :SRI.P.V.CHANDRA MOHAN
For Respondent : No Appearance
The Hon'ble MR. Justice M.N.KRISHNAN
Dated :27/05/2010
O R D E R
M.N. KRISHNAN, J.
...........................................
M.A.C.A.NO.2136 OF 2009
.............................................
Dated this the 27th day of May, 2010.
J U D G M E N T
This appeal is filed against the award of the Claims
Tribunal, Thrissur in OP(MV)No.3122/2002. The claimant
is alleged to have sustained injuries in a road accident
when a lorry is alleged to have hit him resulting in injuries.
But the Tribunal was totally dissatisfied with the materials
available to connect the injuries with the accident and
therefore dismissed the claim application. It is against that
decision, the claimant has come up in appeal.
2. Heard the learned counsel for the appellant. The
learned counsel for the appellant strongly contends before
me that there are sufficient materials to connect the injury
with the accident and therefore the Tribunal should not
have dismissed the application. It is the case of the claimant
that while he was walking along the road, a lorry loaded
with sand came in an uncontrollable manner and hit on him
and ultimately went and hit a coconut tree and capsized.
The factum that a lorry was involved in the accident cannot
: 2 :
M.A.C.A.NO.2136 OF 2009
be disputed in this case for the reason that the occupant of
the lorry – a cleaner by name Shinoj succumbed to the
injury sustained on account of the impact. The police
records also reveal that one Hamsakutti was also involved
in the accident resulting in injuries to him and he was also
treated in the Divine hospital. None of the police records
anywhere suggested or revealed the name of the applicant
having sustained injuries in the accident. Normally when a
person is admitted in a hospital, whether it is private or
Government, on account of a road traffic accident there is a
statutory obligation by way of a government order for the
hospital authorities to prepare a wound certificate. Here
no wound certificate is produced or is there any
contention that such a wound certificate is available. The
magnacarta relied on by the learned counsel is Ext.A4
which is a discharge summary issued by the Divine Medical
Center. There is a noting- history of RTA. The court below
did find the handwriting in different inks and was not
prepared to believe the entries in the same regarding the
road traffic accident.
: 3 :
M.A.C.A.NO.2136 OF 2009
3. When a wound certificate is not there and the
police records are absolutely silent about the involvement
of the claimant in the accident and when a claim is filed
under Section 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act, there is an
imperative duty on the applicant to produce documents to
satisfy the conscience of the Tribunal that the injuries
were sustained by him on account of the road accident.
Except his interested ipsi dixit, other materials are available
other than the entry in the discharge summary which also
does not stand proved. So it was under these suspicious
circumstances the Tribunal found that the claimant has not
succeeded in proving that he has sustained the injuries on
account of the road accident alleged by him. I do not find
that the Tribunal has committed any error in arriving at
such a decision.
Therefore the appeal lacks merit and the same is
dismissed.
M.N. KRISHNAN, JUDGE.
cl
: 4 :
M.A.C.A.NO.2136 OF 2009
: 5 :
M.A.C.A.NO.2136 OF 2009