Motor Accident Claims Appeal where legal heirs of a deceased claimant challenged the Tribunal's dismissal of their compensation claim for death in a 1996 accident. The bench held that the Tribunal was correct in dismissing the appeal as the driver was not charged with negligence in a criminal case. The appeal was dismissed.
The appeal was dismissed.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT:
THE HONOURABLE SMT. JUSTICE P.V.ASHA
TUESDAY, THE 20TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER 2016/29TH BHADRA, 1938
MACA.No. 550 of 2011
OP(MV) 1175/1999 OF MOTOR ACCIDENTS CLAIMS TRIBUNAL, MAVELIKKARA
APPELLANT(S)/PETITIONERS:
1. SHOBHANA, SHIBU BHAVANAM, CHEPPAD.
2. SHIBU, OF -DO-
3. SHEEJA, OF -DO-
4. PONNAYAN, OF -DO-
BY ADV. SRI.RASHEED C.NOORANAD
RESPONDENT(S):
1. S. PURUSHOTHAMAN NAIR, PUTHERATHI VEEDU, KRISHNAPURAM, KAYAMKULAM - 690 502.
2. THE SECRETARY, PRIVATE MOTOR WORKERS INDUSTRIAL, CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETY LIMITED NO. 4203, KAYAMKULAM - 690 502.
3. THE BRANCH MANAGER, UNITED INDIA ASSURANE CO. LTD., KAYAMKULAM - 690 502.
R3 BY ADV. SRI.P.MURALEEDHARAN
THIS MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS APPEAL HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 20-09-2016, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
msv/
P.V.ASHA, J.
M.A.C.A.No.550 of 2011-E
Dated this the 20th day of September, 2016
JUDGMENT
The legal heirs of deceased Rajan, who was injured in a motor vehicle accident, which occurred on 29.07.1996, have filed this appeal aggrieved by the dismissal of the claim petition. Deceased Rajan was thrown away from the motorcycle he was riding, by a bus bearing Reg.No.KLA-9805, on 29.07.1996. During the pendency of the claim petition, he succumbed to the injuries. In the claim petition, the deceased had claimed compensation towards very serious injuries sustained by him which are explained in para 6 of the award of the Tribunal. The insurance company filed a counter affidavit stating that the accident occurred on account of the negligence of the deceased himself. It was stated that the bus was stopped for alighting passengers, when the deceased, who was riding a motorcycle in a rash and negligent manner, hit at its back side.
M.A.C.A.No.550 of 2011-E 2
The Tribunal after considering the documents before it i.e Ext.A1 FIR, the scene mahazars, Ext.A2 and Ext.A3, found that there was nothing in evidence to prove the negligence of the driver of the bus and to substantiate the claim of the appellants. The Tribunal found that no eye witness was also examined. When the insurance company had raised the contention that there was no negligence on the part of the bus driver, it was the duty on the part of the claimants to prove their contentions and in the absence of any evidence, the Tribunal dismissed the claim petition.
3
M.A.C.A.No.550 of 2011-E
Tribunal.
In the above circumstances, I dismiss the appeal.
Sd/- (P.V.ASHA, JUDGE)
rtr/
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal rightly dismissed the claim petition due to lack of evidence proving the driver of the bus was negligent.
Whether the failure to implicate the bus driver as an accused in the final charge report indicates absence of negligence and thus liability.
Shobhana
Shibu
Sheeja
Ponnan
S. Purushothaman Nair
The Secretary, Private Motor Workers Industrial, Co-operative Society Limited
P.V. Asha
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
