Kerala High Court
Kunjappu @ Kunjayamu vs Managing Director on 16 March, 2021
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.V.KUNHIKRISHNAN
TUESDAY, THE 16TH DAY OF MARCH 2021 / 25TH PHALGUNA, 1942
MACA.No.1522 OF 2011
AGAINST THE AWARD IN OPMV 415/2008 DATED 28-02-2011 OF MOTOR
ACCIDENT CLAIMS TRIBUNAL , PALAKKAD
APPELLANT/S:
KUNJAPPU @ KUNJAYAMU
S/O.KUNJIMOHAMMED, AGED 51 YEARS,, CHOLAYIL
VEEDU, MYLAULLY,, NAMPULIPURA POST, KUNDUR,,
PALAKKAD.
BY ADV. SHRI.U.BALAGANGADHARAN
RESPONDENT/S:
1 MANAGING DIRECTOR, KSRTC
KERALA STATE ROAD TRANSPORT CORPORATION,,
THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695001.
2 S.NARAYANAN S/O.SANKARAN
AGED 51 YEARS, AMMU NIVAS,, KODATHARA, CHITTUR,
PALAKKAD,, PIN-678101.
R1 BY ADV. SRI.BABU JOSEPH KURUVATHAZHASCKSRTC
R1 BY SRI.P.C.CHACKO, SC, KERALA STATE ROAD
TRANSPORT CORPN.
OTHER PRESENT:
SRI.P.C.CHACKO, SC(KSRTC)
THIS MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS APPEAL HAVING BEEN FINALLY
HEARD ON 16.03.2021, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE
FOLLOWING:
MACA.No.1522 OF 2011 2
P.V.KUNHIKRISHNAN, J
-----------------------------------------------
M.A.C.A. No. 1522 of 2011
--------------------------------------
Dated this the 16th day of March, 2021
JUDGMENT
The appellant is the petitioner in O.P.(M.V.) No.415/2008 on the
file of the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Palakkad. It is a claim
petition filed under Sec.166 of the Motor Vehicles Act.
2. The short facts are like this :
On 27.9.2006, while the appellant was standing on the road side,
a KSRTC bus bearing registration No. KL 15-3820 driven in a rash
and negligent manner hit on the appellant. He was thrown out to the
road and he sustained grievous injuries. According to the appellant,
the accident occurred due to the rash and negligent driving of the bus
by the 2nd respondent. The 1 st respondent is the Managing Director of
KSRTC. The appellant claimed an amount of Rs.9,00,000/- as
compensation.
3. To substantiate the case, the appellant produced Exts. A1
to A9. After going through the documents and pleadings, the Tribunal
awarded an amount of Rs.45,000/- as compensation with interest at
the rate of 7.5% per annum from the date of application till
realization. Aggrieved by the quantum of compensation, this appeal is
filed.
4. Heard counsel for the appellant and counsel for the 1 st
respondent.
5. The counsel for the appellant submitted that the appellant
sustained very serious injuries and his total disability was 47% (whole
body). He produced Ext.A8 disability certificate before the Tribunal to
prove the same. But the Tribunal has not considered the same.
According to the counsel, the appellant was ready to appear before a
Medical Board to assess his disability. Even though such a request
was made before the Tribunal, the counsel submitted that the same
was rejected by the Tribunal and an award is passed in which no
amount is granted for disability. The counsel submitted that the
appellant is entitled more compensation in the other heads also.
6. Along with this appeal, I.A. No.2589/2011 was filed with a
prayer to issue appropriate direction to the Superintendent, District
Hospital, Palakkad to constitute a Medical Board and assess the
disability and earning capacity of the appellant. The appellant has got
a definite case that there is disability to him and he is even ready to
appear before the Medical Board. In such circumstances, according to
me, this matter can be remanded to the lower court directing the
Tribunal to re-consider the matter afresh. If a petition is filed by the
appellant to constitute a Medical Board to assess the disability of the
appellant, the Tribunal will allow the same. Thereafter, Tribunal will
allow the parties to adduce evidence and then decide the case in
accordance to law.
Therefore, this appeal is allowed.
1) The award dated 28.2.2011 in O.P.(M.V.) No.415/2008 on the
file of the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Palakkad is set aside.
2) The Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Palakkad is directed
to restore O.P.(M.V.) No.415/2008.
3) If an application is filed by the appellant to constitute a
Medical Board to assess the disability and earning capacity of the
appellant, the Tribunal will allow the same and do the needful, in
accordance to the law.
4) If an application is filed by the appellant to examine the
doctor, who issued Ext.A8 disability certificate, the Tribunal will
allow the same also.
5) The Tribunal will allow both parties to adduce further oral
and documentary evidence, if any.
6) Thereafter, the Tribunal will decide the matter afresh as
expeditiously as possible, at any rate, within 6 months from the
date of receipt of a copy of this judgment.
sd/-
P.V.KUNHIKRISHNAN
JUDGE
SKS
