Sasidharan Nair vs Joy Joseph on 26 August, 2008

       

  

  

 
 
  IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

MACA.No. 1710 of 2004()


1. SASIDHARAN NAIR, S/O. KRISHNAN NAIR,
                      ...  Petitioner

                        Vs



1. JOY JOSEPH,
                       ...       Respondent

2. PRINCE, S/O. MADHAVAN,

3. UNITED INDIA INSURANCE CO. LTD.,

                For Petitioner  :SRI.K.JAJU BABU

                For Respondent  : No Appearance

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

 Dated :26/08/2008

 O R D E R
                     M.N. KRISHNAN, J.
              = = = = = = = = = = = = = =
                M.A.C.A. NO. 1710 OF 2004
            = = = = = = = = = = = = = = =
       Dated this the 26th day of August, 2008.

                      J U D G M E N T

This appeal is preferred against the award of the Motor

Accidents Claims Tribunal, Muvattupuzha in O.P.(MV)

1446/99. It was an application filed for personal injuries and

damages sustained to a jeep in a road accident. Learned

counsel would submit that she is mainly pressing on the

question of damages to the jeep. The Tribunal has assessed

the damages and arrived at a figure of Rs.21,300/- but

disallowed that claim on the ground that the ownership has

not been proved. A perusal of the award would reveal that

the Tribunal has referred to Ext.A9. Unfortunately, there is

no such document marked in the case. It is a charge sheet

wherein the name of the registered owner is shown as one

Kuriakose. If the Tribunal had entertained any doubt

regarding the ownership especially in the back drop when

there was no serious dispute regarding the ownership of the

jeep involved in the accident the Tribunal could have directed

M.A.C.A. 1710 OF 2004
-:2:-

the claimant to produce acceptable evidence to prove the

same and relying on a document which is not marked, should

not have non-suited the claimant on that basis. Therefore

interest of justice requires an opportunity to be given to the

claimant to establish that factor. Therefore the award under

challenge is set aside so far as it relates to the dis-allowance

of the claim for damages sustained to the jeep and the

appellant herein is permitted to adduce both documentary as

well as oral evidence in support of his contentions that he

was the owner in possession of the vehicle at the time of the

accident as contemplated under S.2(30) of the M.V.Act or

the registered owner of the vehicle, as the case may be, and

then dispose of the matter in accordance with law. Parties

are directed to appear before the Tribunal on 17.10.08.

M.N. KRISHNAN, JUDGE.

ul/-