IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
MACA.No. 1236 of 2010()
1. JAIMON PETER @ JAIMON,
... Petitioner
Vs
1. T.B.SUDARSANAN,
... Respondent
2. C.JAYENDRANATH,
3. ORIENTAL INSURANCE CO.LTD., ALAPPUZHA.
4. NATIONAL INSURANCE CO.LTD., D.O. III,
For Petitioner :SRI.K.C.CHARLES
For Respondent :SRI.P.V.ELIAS
The Hon'ble MR. Justice M.N.KRISHNAN
Dated :07/10/2010
O R D E R
M.N.KRISHNAN, J.
-----------------------------------------
M.A.C.A NO.1236 OF 2010
----------------------------------------
Dated this the 7th day of October, 2010.
JUDGMENT
This is an appeal preferred against the award of the Motor
Accidents Claims Tribunal, Ernakulam in O.P(MV).No.267 of 1998.
The claimant was the driver of the Jeep which got involved in the
accident. It is the case of the claimant that, while he was
proceeding to the hospital with some injured persons in a fire
accident, the car driven by the 2nd respondent came in a rash
and negligent manner and hit on his Jeep resulting in one of the
tyres of the Jeep being broken. The First Information Statement
was given by the driver of the car and, therefore, he was made
the accused in a criminal case. After trial he was acquitted. But
unfortunately the Tribunal has proceeded as if the case was
registered against the driver of the car and it had ended in
acquittal. The learned counsel also would argue that on account
of the impact of the accident the tyre had broken and, therefore,
necessarily driver of the vehicle would have lost its control and it
would have reached the other side of the road. If really that had
taken place that may lead to a fact regarding negligence on the
car driver. But these are all materials which require cogent
M.A.C.A NO.1236 OF 2010 2
evidence. Merely relying on a scene mahazar, it may be possible
to hold that there is negligence on one of the parties in these
types of cases. It is also submitted by learned counsel for the
appellant that the petitions filed to examine witness were
dismissed. So I am inclined to grant an opportunity. Therefore,
award under challenge is set aside and the matter is remitted
back to the Tribunal with a direction to permit all concerned to
produce oral as well as documentary evidence in support of their
respective contentions and then the Tribunal shall dispose of the
matter in accordance with law. The parties are directed to appear
before the Tribunal on 8.11.2010.
M.N.KRISHNAN, JUDGE.
mns