High Court Kerala High Court

Fathima vs T.Narayanan on 2 December, 2008

Kerala High Court
Fathima vs T.Narayanan on 2 December, 2008
       

  

  

 
 
  IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

MACA.No. 1209 of 2008()


1. FATHIMA, W/O.AHAMADUNNI,
                      ...  Petitioner

                        Vs



1. T.NARAYANAN, S/O.KUMARAN,
                       ...       Respondent

2. RAJENDRAN, S/O.KUMARAN,

3. THE NEW INDIA ASSURANCE COMPANY LIMITED,

                For Petitioner  :SRI.V.CHITAMBARESH (SR.)

                For Respondent  :SRI.P.JAYASANKAR

The Hon'ble MR. Justice M.N.KRISHNAN

 Dated :02/12/2008

 O R D E R
                           M.N.KRISHNAN, J
                       =====================
                    MACA Nos.1209 & 1239 OF 2008
                       =====================

               Dated this the 2nd day of December 2008

                                JUDGMENT

These appeals are preferred against the award of the Motor Accidents

Claims Tribunal, Ottappalam in O.P.(MV)Nos.1066 & 1068 of 2005. The

claimants were passengers in an autorickshaw which met with an accident

when it collided with a bus resulting in sustainment of injuries to them.

Claimants did not adduce any oral evidence before the Tribunal and the

Tribunal on the basis of the scene mahazar found the autorickshaw driver

negligent and dismissed the cases. It is against that decision, the present

appeals are preferred by the claimants.

2. Heard the counsel for the appellants as well as the counsel for the

insurance company. Learned counsel for the appellants would contend that

the Tribunal was not fully justified in relying upon the recitals in the scene

mahazar alone to arrive at a decision that the autorickshaw driver was

totally negligent. He would also contend that on the basis of the scene

mahazar and other evidence available, the police has charge sheeted the

driver of the bus and that has not been considered at all by the Tribunal. A

MACA 1209 & 1239/2008 -:2:-

perusal of the scene mahazar prima facie would indicate that there is

negligence on the part of the autorickshaw driver. The road was having a

width of 3.70 metres. The accident had taken place 25 cms. east of the

western tar end. The bus was proceeding from south to north and the

autorickshaw from the opposite direction. Prima facie the place of accident

would indicate that the autorickshaw has transgressed to the wrong side at

the time of accident. It has always to be remembered that when an accident

is about to take place, that too, on a curve of the road, normally there will be

a tendency for the drivers of the vehicles to swerve the vehicles to avert the

accident. Then the position of the vehicles immediately after the accident

may not be a conclusive factor to find out how the accident took place. This

can be explained by adducing evidence in the matter. Further, the claimants

should not be deprived of any compensation as they have not contributed

anything to the accident and they can also be given an opportunity to

implead the driver, owner and the insurance company of the autorickshaw

so that the matter can be decided with all on record. Therefore the award

under challenge is set aside and the matter is remitted back to the Tribunal

with a direction to permit the claimants to amend the application by

impleadment, if they choose to do so and also to adduce both documentary

as well as oral evidence in support of their respective contentions and then

MACA 1209 & 1239/2008 -:3:-

dispose of the matter in accordance with law. Parties are directed to appear

before the Tribunal on 5.1.2009.

MACAs are disposed of as above.

M.N.KRISHNAN, JUDGE

Cdp/-