IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
MACA.No. 1618 of 2007()
1. NATIONAL INSURANCE COMPANY LIMITED,
... Petitioner
Vs
1. SURESH M.K., S/O.KUTTAPPAN,
... Respondent
2. V.K.SUBHASH, S/O.KOCHUNNI, VIYATH
For Petitioner :SRI.MATHEWS JACOB (SR.)
For Respondent :SRI.SHEJI P.ABRAHAM
The Hon'ble MR. Justice M.N.KRISHNAN
Dated :15/12/2008
O R D E R
M.N. KRISHNAN, J
-----------------------
M.A.C.A.No. 1618 OF 2007
---------------------------------
Dated this the 15th day of December, 2008
JUDGMENT
This appeal is preferred against the award of the Motor
Accident Claims Tribunal, Thrissur in O.P.(MV) No.3665/2000. The
claimant, alleged to have injuries in a road accident and the tribunal
awarded an amount of Rs. 76,850/-. It is the case of the claimant
that on 19.8.2000 while he was riding a motor cycle and when it
reached to near Ollur, another motor cycle came in a rash and
negligent manner hit on the petitioner’s vehicle resulting in
sustainment of injuries.
2. The first respondent would contend that the accident was
due to negligent of the claimant himself. The 2nd respondent would
contend that there was no accident involving the said vehicle. As
per the records kept in Holy Family Hospital, Ollur, the petitioner
attended the casualty on 19.8.2000 with a history of alleged fall
from bike. In the discharge summary issued from the Aswini
Hospital, Thrissur it is recorded that the injury was due to a hit by
an autorickshaw. The tribunal found in favour of the claimant and
ordered compensation. It is against the same the Insurance
Company has come up in appeal.
M.A.C.A.No. 1618/2007
-2-
3. Heard the learned counsel for both sides. The tribunal was
relying upon the police records to arrive at a decision regarding the
factum of accident. Even if the case of the claimant is true, the
accident had taken place in the month of August and the law was
set in motion by filing a complaint only after 3 = months. As usual
a reference was made under section 156(3) and police has filed a
charge sheet. The first document namely the document relating to
the admission of the claimant immediately after the accident would
reveal that the cause of injuries on account of the fall from a bike.
When he was admitted after about 1 = months in another hospital,
the reason given is hit by an autorickshaw. The trial court accepted
the explanation that as he was unconscious, the information was
furnished by the respondents. First of all it has to be proved that
he was unconscious. If he was unconscious it was not possible for
him by any stretch imagination to find out who had given the
information. So the acceptance of such an explanation given by
PW1 cannot be accepted by this Court. If really he is involved in an
accident and if it is proved he is entitled to the compensation. But
the factum of not reporting the matter to any authority for a period
of 3 = months and giving a conflicting statement in each and every
hospital, where he had visited and finally setting the law in motion
M.A.C.A.No. 1618/2007
-3-
after 3 = months and are all matters which has to be seriously
considered by the tribunal. Original records kept in the hospital
would speak in volumes about the cause of accident. Those records
can be produced, parties can be permitted to adduce evidence and
the court can find out the truth and then dispose of the matter in
accordance with law. Mere filing of charge sheet on the basis of
private complaint filed by party after about 3 = months from the
date of accident cannot be considered as a valid evidence, when
there are conflicting materials staring at the face of the claimant.
Therefore I set aside the award passed by the tribunal and
remit back the case to the tribunal with a direction to permit the
claimant as well as the respondents to produce documentary as well
as oral evidence in support of their respective contentions and then
dispose of the matter in accordance with law. It has to be also
understood that I have not expressed any view on the merits of the
case and everything be decided on appreciation of evidence and the
materials that is made available before the court.
Parties are directed to appear before the tribunal on
20.1.2009.
M.N. KRISHNAN,JUDGE
vkm