Iqbal vs The Branch Manager
2021 Latest Caselaw 8541 Ker

Citation : 2021 Latest Caselaw 8541 Ker
Judgement Date : 15 March, 2021

Kerala High Court

Iqbal vs The Branch Manager on 15 March, 2021

             IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

                              PRESENT

           THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.V.KUNHIKRISHNAN

     MONDAY, THE 15TH DAY OF MARCH 2021 / 24TH PHALGUNA, 1942

                        MACA.No.420 OF 2010

 AGAINST THE AWARD IN OPMV 161/2003 DATED 27-06-2008 OF DISTRICT
   COURT & SESIONS & MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS TRIBUNAL ,KALPETTA


APPELLANT/PETITIONER:

             IQBAL, S/O.IBRAHIM,
             AGED 14 YEARS, REP. BY NEXT FRIEND GUARDIAN, MOTHER
             RAMLA, D/O. UMMER, HARIPRATHODI HOUSE,, MEPPADI POST,
             MEPPAINAD, VYTHIRI TALUK, WAYANAD.

             BY ADV. SMT.CELINE JOSEPH

RESPONDENT/RESPONDENT NO.3:

             THE BRANCH MANAGER,ORIENTAL INSURANCE CO.LTD.
             BRANCH OFFICE,, 28, SALAM ROAD, COONOOR-643 102.

             R1 BY ADV. SRI.GEORGE CHERIAN (SR.)
             R1 BY ADV. SRI.ALEXY AUGUSTINE

OTHER PRESENT:

             SMT.K.S.SANTHI, SC

    THIS MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS APPEAL HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON

15.03.2021, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
 M.A.C.A.No.420 of 2010
                                       2




                          P.V.KUNHIKRISHNAN, J.
                       --------------------------------
                          M.A.C.A. No.420 of 2010
                        -------------------------------
                   Dated this the 15th day of March, 2021

                                JUDGMENT

This Appeal is filed by the petitioner in O.P.(MV) No. 161/2003

on the file of the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Kalpetta. The

application was filed under Section 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act.

2. The short facts are like this: On 28.2.2003 at about 12.30

p.m., the petitioner was walking along the side of the Vaduvanchal-

Meppadi public road and while so, a Jeep bearing registration No.

KL-13A/5652 driven by the first respondent in a rash and negligent

manner knocked down him and thereby he sustained serious

injuries. He was taken to various hospitals. According to the

appellant/petitioner, the accident occurred due to the rash and

negligent driving of jeep by the first respondent. The second and

third respondents are the owner and insurer of the jeep

respectively at the time of the accident. According to the

appellant/petitioner all the respondents are jointly and severally M.A.C.A.No.420 of 2010

liable to pay the compensation.

3. To substantiate the case, the appellant/petitioner

produced Exts. A1 to A5 and the appellant himself was examined as

PW1. After going through the evidence and documents, the

Tribunal passed an award of Rs.7,000/- with interest as

compensation for the injury sustained to him. Aggrieved by the

quantum of compensation, this appeal is filed.

4. Heard the counsel for the appellant and the Standing

counsel for the respondent.

5. The counsel for the appellant submitted that the appellant

sustained very serious injuries and he is even ready to appear

before a Medical Board to prove that there is permanent disability

to him. He also submitted that he wants to produce some

additional documents also to prove his claim. The counsel for the

appellant submitted that the quantum of compensation fixed by the

Tribunal is too low. The counsel for the respondent submitted that

the Tribunal fixed the compensation based on the available

materials and there is nothing to interfere with the impugned

award.

6. After hearing both sides, I think, this matter can be M.A.C.A.No.420 of 2010

remanded to the Tribunal for giving an opportunity to the

appellant/petitioner to adduce further evidence. According to the

appellant, he sustained very serious injuries and even now there is

disability to him because of the injury sustained to him in the

accident. But there is no documents to prove the same. The

counsel for the appellant submitted that the appellant produced a

disability certificate before the Tribunal. But that was not marked.

This case was heard in part on 8.3.2021. On that date, the counsel

for the appellant submitted that she will consult her client and

inform whether the client is ready to appear before the Medical

Board. Now the counsel submitted that the appellant is ready to

appear before the Medical Board and he also wants to adduce

further oral and documentary evidence before the Tribunal. If that

is the case, according to me, it is better to remand the matter to

the trial court instead of this Court directing the appellant to appear

before a Medical Board and get a certificate because, oral and

documentary evidence are necessary in the facts and circumstances

of the case. Therefore, this appeal can be allowed directing the

Tribunal to reconsider the matter afresh.

7. In the result, this appeal is allowed in the following M.A.C.A.No.420 of 2010

manner:

1. The award dated 27.6.2008 in O.P.(MV) No.

161/2003 on the file of the Motor Accidents Claims

Tribunal, Kalpetta is set aside. The Tribunal is directed

to restore the above case.

2. If an application is filed by the appellant/petitioner

for examination by a Medical Board, the Tribunal will

allow the same.

3. The Tribunal will allow the petitioner/appellant and

respondent to adduce further oral and documentary

evidence if any. Thereafter, the Tribunal will decide the

matter afresh after hearing both sides.

4.The parties will appear before the Tribunal on

12.4.2021. The Tribunal will dispose the matter as

expeditiously as possible, at any rate, within a period

of six months from the date of receipt of a copy of this

judgment.