IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
MACA.No. 1944 of 2005()
1. T.O.DEVASY, AGED 51,
... Petitioner
Vs
1. JOSE T.D., S/O.DEVASSY,
... Respondent
2. REETHA JOSE, W/O.JOSE,
3. THE ORIENTAL INSURANCE CO LTD.,
For Petitioner :SRI.V.K.GOPALAKRISHNA PILLAI
For Respondent :DR.ELIZABETH VARKEY
The Hon'ble MR. Justice M.N.KRISHNAN
Dated :11/06/2008
O R D E R
M.N.KRISHNAN, J.
----------------------------------------------
M.A.C.A Nos.1944 & 1973 of 2005
----------------------------------------------
Dated 11th June, 2008.
J U D G M E N T
C.M.Appln.Nos.2736/05 in MACA 1944/05 & 2789/05 in MACA
1973/05 : For the reasons stated in the accompanying affidavits, I
find that there is sufficient cause for condoning the delay.
Accordingly, the applications are allowed.
These appeals are preferred against the common
award of the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Perumbavoor in
O.P.(MV) No.830/2000 and 1594/1999 respectively. The Tribunal
held that the claimants have not succeeded in proving that they
were travelling in the bus which got involved in the accident and
therefore, dismissed the petitions.
2. Learned counsel for the claimants would submit
that the approach of the Tribunal has been technical and really
the claimants were travelling in the bus. That fact has been
spoken to by one of the witnesses. It is also submitted that if an
opportunity is given, he will be able to satisfy the conscience of
the court regarding the genuineness. If actually these persons
also had travelled in the bus when the accident took place, I do
not want to defeat their real interest. When a bus accident takes
MACA Nos.1944 & 1973/05 2
place and a large number of persons are involved resulting in
injuries to them and when wound certificates and other
certificates are prepared, there is every likelihood of some
omission and that shall not be a ground to reject the claim, if
really they are involved. The matter has to be looked into in that
angle as well, and if the court is satisfied that there is some truth
in what the claimants say, then it is for the court to decide the
issue. Therefore, I set aside the award passed by the Tribunal and
remit the case back to the Tribunal with liberty to the claimants to
adduce both documentary and oral evidence in support of their
respective contentions. Needless to say that the respondents are
also free to adduce evidence in support of their respective
contentions, and the court shall decide the matter after hearing all
the concerned parties. The parties shall appear before the
Tribunal on 23.7.2008.
M.N.KRISHNAN, JUDGE.
tgs
M.N.KRISHNAN, J.
———————————————-
M.A.C.A. Nos.1944 & 1973 of 2005
———————————————-
J U D G M E N T
Dated 11th June, 2008.