IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
MACA.No. 944 of 2008()
1. SIVAN, S/O. KANDOTHY,
... Petitioner
Vs
1. BABY, S/O. PAULOSE,
... Respondent
2. P.I. JACOB, S/O. ISSAC,
3. UNITED INDIA INSURANCE CO. LTD.,
For Petitioner :SRI.P.V.GEORGE(PUTHIYIDAM)
For Respondent : No Appearance
The Hon'ble MR. Justice R.BASANT
The Hon'ble MRS. Justice M.C.HARI RANI
Dated :19/01/2010
O R D E R
R.BASANT & M.C.HARI RANI, JJ.
———————————————-
C.M.Application No. 972 OF 2008
&
M.A.C.A.No.944 OF 2008
—————————————————–
DATED THIS THE 19th DAY OF JANUARY, 2010
O R D E R/J U D G M E N T
Basant, J.
This petition is to condone the delay of 160 days in
filing an appeal. Service is complete. Appellant is the
claimant. There is no representation for the respondents.
We are satisfied,in the circumstances of the case, that a
lenient view can be taken, petition for condonation of delay
can be allowed and the appeal itself can be disposed of
straightaway. This application is in these circumstances
allowed. Delay is condoned.
M.A.C.A.NO.944/08
2. Claimant is the appellant. The claimant was the
rider of a motor vehicle involved in the accident. There was
a pillion rider also. The motor cycle which the claimant was
riding and the said pillion was travelling was involved in an
accident with a vehicle owned by the 2nd respondent insured
M.A.C.A.NO.944/08 -2-
with the 3rd respondent and driven by the 1st respondent.
3. The Tribunal, strangely we must say, took up the
claims by the rider and the pillion separately. Separate
awards were passed. Both claims were dismissed on the
ground that the appellant herein is negligent. The pillion
rider preferred an appeal and a Division Bench of this Court
earlier vide judgment dated 26.11.2008 has set aside the
said award and had sent the matter back to the court below.
That claim – O.P.(MV)No.1343/02 was pending before the
M.A.C.T., Muvattupuzha and the same has now been
disposed of allowing the claim in part, it is submitted. The
learned counsel for the appellant submits that the appellant
would have accepted the said finding of attribution of equal
negligence of both drivers. But, at any rate, the matter has
to be sent back to the court below for fresh disposal in
accordance with law to ascertain the quantum of
compensation payable.
4. We accept the request of the learned counsel for
the appellant. We set aside the impugned award and send
M.A.C.A.NO.944/08 -3-
the same back to the Tribunal for fresh disposal in
accordance with law.
5. The parties shall appear before the Tribunal on
01.03.2010 to continue the proceedings. The Tribunal shall
dispose of the claim as expeditiously thereafter as possible-
at any rate within a period of three months from that date.
Compliance shall be reported to this Court.
R.BASANT, JUDGE.
M.C.HARI RANI, JUDGE.
dsn