IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
MACA.No. 21 of 2007()
1. DHORA S/O.PONMALA, AGED 32 YEARS,
... Petitioner
2. SANTHOSH (MINOR) S/O.DHORA,
Vs
1. RAMAKRISHNAN, S/O.KANDAMUTHAN,
... Respondent
2. T.N.S.MOHAN, S/O.T.P.NADESAN,
3. M/S.THE UNITED INDIA INSURANCE COMPANY
4. THAYU, W/O CHINNAN, AGED 66 YEARS,
5. KUTTAYIL, S/O.LATE CHINNAN,
6. RAJAN, S/O.LATE CHINNAN,
7. THANKAMANI, D/O LATE CHINNAN, DO. DO.
8. LAKSHMI, D/O.LATE CHINNAN, DO. DO.
For Petitioner :SRI.BINOY VASUDEVAN
For Respondent :SRI.SAJEEV KUMAR K.GOPAL
The Hon'ble MR. Justice A.K.BASHEER
The Hon'ble MR. Justice P.Q.BARKATH ALI
Dated :04/02/2010
O R D E R
A. K. Basheer & P.Q. Barkath Ali, JJ.
– – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – –
M.A.C.A.No. 21 of 2007-A
– – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – –
Dated this the 4th day of February, 2010.
Judgment
Basheer, J:
This appeal is directed against the award passed by the Moor
Accidents’ Claims Tribunal, Palakkad dismissing the Claim
Petition filed by the appellants on the ground that another Claim
Petition filed by the parents of the deceased was already pending
consideration before another Tribunal.
2. Admittedly the appellants are the husband and son of
deceased Rugmini. It may be true that the parents of deceased
Rugmini have preferred another Claim Petition which is
admittedly pending on the file of the First Addl. District Court,
Palakkad. But since the claim petition filed by the appellants was
pending on the file of Tribunal at Palakkad, a joint trial might not
have been possible unless so ordered. But still, in our view, the
Tribunal was not justified in dismissing the Claim Petition filed by
the appellants. An opportunity could have been given to the
appellants to take necessary steps. The observation made by the
learned Judge that there would be undue enrichment if the two
petitions were allowed, may not be correct. Further, the
observation made by the learned Judge insinuating that the
appellants and their counsel were “clever” in not filing an
MACA.21/2007. 2
application for joint trial is totally uncharitable and unwarranted.
3. Learned counsel for the appellants submits that OP (MV).
No.644/97 filed by the parents of the deceased is still pending trial
on the file of the Addl.District Court & Addl.Motor Accidents
Claims Tribunal, Palakkad.
4. Having regard to the entire facts and circumstances, we
are satisfied that the award under challenge is liable to be set aside.
We do so. The case is remitted back to the Motor Accidents Claims
Tribunal, Palakkad.
5. OP (MV).No.644/97, which is now pending on the file of
the Addl.District Court, Palakkad shall be transferred to the
Tribunal at Palakkad to be tried along with OP (MV)No.562/97.
6. Appellants shall appear before the Motor Accidents
Claims Tribunal, Palakkad on March 10, 2010.
The appeal is disposed of in the above terms.
A.K. Basheer
Judge
P.Q. Barkath Ali
Judge.
an.