Dismissed

Ayyappan v. T.K.Babu

Kerala HC20 Aug 2008MACA/706/2003

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Kerala High Court dismissed an appeal filed to enhance compensation awarded for a motor accident. The court doubted the genuineness of the appellant's claim due to delays in hospital admission and lack of corroborative evidence, finding no reason to interfere with the Tribunal's award. A separate entry for I.T.A. No. 81 of 2000 is noted but lacks substantive text.

What the court decided

AI extract

Ayyappan Vs T.K.Babu — Motor Accident Claims | Kerala HC (2008)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT :

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE C.N.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR &

¶4

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE V.K.MOHANAN

¶5

WEDNESDAY, THE 20TH AUGUST, 2008 / 29TH SRAVANA, 1930

¶6

MACA.No. 706 of 2003 [OPMV.835/1997 of MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS TRIBUNAL, IRINJALAKUDA]

¶7

APPELLANT/PETITIONER IN OO(MV):

¶8

--------------------------------------------AYYAPPAN, AGED 49 YEARS, S/O. KUNJIYYAPPAN, KOTTAMCHIRA HOUSE, RESIDING AT NALUKETTU DESOM, KORATTY-KIZHAKKUMMURI VILLAGE, NALUKETTU P.O., MUKUNDAPAURAM TALUK, THRISSUR DISTRICT.

¶9

BY ADV. SRI.P.V.BABY SRI.A.N.SANTHOSH SRI.MATHEW GOPURAN

¶10

RESPONDENTS/RESPONDENTS IN OP(MV):

¶11

¶12

T.K.BABU, S/O. KUMARAN, THOTTATHIL HOUSE, NALUKETTU P.O., OWNER - KL-8/F-6307, AUTORIKSHAW.

¶13

JIBBY, S/O. VELAYUDHAN, VADALATHIL HOUSE, NALUKETTU P.O., DRIVER -KL-8/F-6307, AUTORIKSHAW.

¶14

THE ORIENTAL INSURANCE CO., CHALAKUDY, POLICY 2932/1997, VALIDITY 20.10.1996 TO 19.10.1997, INSURER KL-8/F/6307 AUTORIKSHAW.

¶15

ADV. SRI.SHEEJO CHACKO FOR R1 & R2

¶16

ADV.SRI.GEORGE CHERIAN (THIRUVALLA) FOR R3

¶17

THIS MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS APPEAL HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 20/08/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

¶18

C.N.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR

¶19

& V.K.MOHANAN, JJ.

¶20

M.A.C.A.No. 706 of 2003

¶21

Dated this the 20^th day of August, 2008

¶22

J U D G M E N T

¶23

Ramachandran Nair,J:

¶24

This appeal is filed for enhancement of compensation awarded in a motor accident claim. We have heard learned counsel for the appellant as well as the Standing Counsel appearing for the third respondent.

¶25

The case of the appellant is that he fell down from a running autorickshaw and sustained injury. However, the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal held that the accident was caused partly on account of the negligence of the appellant.

¶26

We do not find any evidence to substantiate the appellant's case that he fell down from the autorickshaw on account of rash and negligent driving by the autorickshaw driver. Even though the accident had happened at about 10 p.m. on 10.6.1997, the appellant was taken to hospital by his wife only on the next day. Even though counsel contended that in the previous night,

¶27

MACA NO. 706 OF 2003

¶28

:-2-:

¶29

he was given treatment in a private hospital, there is no record about his admission in the hospital on reporting of accident. In fact, the genuineness of the accident claimed by the appellant himself has to be doubted. In any case, we do not find anything to interfere with the award of the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal.

¶30

The appeal is accordingly dismissed.

¶31

C.N.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR, Judge

¶32

V.K.MOHANAN, Judge

¶33

MBS/

¶34

MACA NO. 706 OF 2003

¶35

:-3-:

¶36

C.N.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR & V.K.MOHANAN, JJ.

I.T.A.NO. 81 OF 2000

J U D G M E N T

MACA NO. 706 OF 2003

¶41

:-4-:

¶42

DATED:17-6-2008

Ayyappan v. T.K.Babu

Case brief

What is this about?

What the court decided

Ayyappan v. T.K.Babu

Case brief

What is this about?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

R.Anil Kumar Vs the Travancore Devaswom Board

Sheela Vs Basheer

Varghese S/O Paily Vs Mercy George

Justus Jon Vs Christian Jose

Usha W/O.Late Manamadhan Nair Vs Radhakrishnan

Reghuvaran.G. Vs State of Kerala