IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
MACA.No. 1405 of 2009()
1. AJITHKUMAR, AGED 40 YEARS,
... Petitioner
Vs
1. K.P.BABU, S/O.DEVAKI,
... Respondent
2. SHAJIKUMAR, S/O.BALAN,
3. ORIENTAL INSURANCE COMPANY LTD.,
For Petitioner :SRI.P.S.SREEDHARAN PILLAI
For Respondent :SMT.A.SREEKALA
The Hon'ble MR. Justice A.K.BASHEER
The Hon'ble MR. Justice P.Q.BARKATH ALI
Dated :28/01/2010
O R D E R
A. K. Basheer & P.Q.Barkath Ali, JJ.
– – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – –
M.A.C.A.No. 1405 of 2009
– – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – –
Dated this the 28th day of January, 2010.
Judgment
Basheer, J:
The claimant before the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal is
the appellant. He filed the Claim Petition under Section 166 of the
Motor Vehicles act claiming a sum of Rs.1,25,000/- as
compensation for the injuries allegedly sustained by him in an
accident that occurred on May 8, 2002. According to the appellant-
claimant, he was travelling in an auto rickshaw bearing
registration No.KL 11 – K 8893 on the crucial day. A bus bearing
registration No. KRZ 9522 hit against the auto. Appellant
sustained injuries as a result of the accident.
2. When the petition was taken up for trial it was noticed by
the Tribunal that the claimant had not impleaded the owner,
driver and the insurer of the autorickshaw. The claimant had not
also bothered to get himself examined before the Court. He had
only produced a copy of the wound certificate issued to him from
the hospital shortly after the accident. No medical bills were also
produced. Though the claimant had allegedly suffered some injury
on the spinal cord (C5 – 6 level), there was no supporting evidence
to substantiate the claim. Appellant is stated to be a business man.
He had not even bothered to prove what was the actual damages
MACA.1405/09 2
suffered by him because of the accident. The Tribunal granted a
sum of Rs.3500/- to the claimant and ordered recovery of 50% of
the said amount from respondents 1 and 2.
3. Having carefully perused the award and the other materials
available on record, we do not find any reason to accede to the
request of the learned counsel for the appellant to remit the case
back to the Tribunal, especially since the appellant does not have a
case that he had suffered any serious injury. The appellant has not
even bothered to produce before us any medical records to show
that he had undergone any treatment after the accident. Keeping
in view all the circumstances we are not inclined to interfere with
the award passed by the Tribunal.
Appeal fails and it is accordingly dismissed.
A.K. Basheer
Judge
P.Q. Barkath Ali
Judge.
an.