High Court Kerala High Court

Geeva George vs Sunil Varghese on 24 July, 2008

Kerala High Court
Geeva George vs Sunil Varghese on 24 July, 2008
       

  

  

 
 
  IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

MACA.No. 1696 of 2005()


1. GEEVA GEORGE, S/O. K.D. GEORGE,
                      ...  Petitioner

                        Vs



1. SUNIL VARGHESE,
                       ...       Respondent

2. THE ORIENTAL INSURANCE COMPANY LIMITED,

                For Petitioner  :SMT.LATHA PRABHAKARAN

                For Respondent  :SRI.MATHEWS JACOB (SR.)

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

 Dated :24/07/2008

 O R D E R
                      M.N. KRISHNAN, J.
               = = = = = = = = = = = = = =
                 M.A.C.A. NO. 1696 OF 2005
              = = = = = = = = = = = = = = =
         Dated this the 24th day of July, 2008.

                       J U D G M E N T

This appeal is preferred against the award of the Motor

Accidents Claims Tribunal, Thrissur in O.P.(MV)369/00. It

relates to claim for damages sustained to a vehicle in a road

accident. It was a Maruthi van which belonged to the

claimant. The Tribunal has found that there is a work

estimate of Rs.31,700/- under Ext.A12 and there is Ext.A13

quotation for Rs.35,215/-. The Tribunal ultimately says that

it is awarding a compensation of Rs.20,000/-. There is no

basis for such a decision. Even otherwise it has to be stated

that a mere surveyor’s report or estimate shall not be the

basis for fixing the quantum unless there is evidence to show

what is the amount expended for repairing the vehicle and

for purchasing the spare parts. So the claimant is directed to

adduce evidence to show the real expenses incurred by him

for effecting the repairs of the vehicle. It is also to be stated

that depreciation need not be deducted unless the vehicle is

M.A.C.A. 1696 OF 2005
-:2:-

sold for scrap value which has rendered the vehicle useless

on account of the accident. Spare parts are being purchased

to put the vehicle back into a roadworthy condition for which

spare parts has to be purchased. It is laid down in the

decision reported in M.R. Narahari Pandit v. Veenadevi

Jalan (1997 ACJ 245) and the Division Bench of this Court

in the decision reported in MACA 693/04 had taken the same

view. So I direct the Tribunal at the stage of disposal of the

matter not to deduct any value for depreciation. The

claimant will be entitled to get compensation for the

purchase of the spare parts, labour charges, towing charges

etc. and that can be determined by the Tribunal in

accordance with law. Therefore the award under challenge is

set aside and the matter is remitted back to the Tribunal for

consideration of the above point after permitting both sides

to adduce both documentary as well as oral evidence in

support of their respective contentions. Parties are directed

to appear before the Tribunal on 1.9.08.

M.N. KRISHNAN, JUDGE.

ul/-