M .Kabeer vs Iffco Tokio General Insurance ...
2022 Latest Caselaw 7518 Ker

         IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
                             PRESENT
         THE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE SOPHY THOMAS
   FRIDAY, THE 24TH DAY OF JUNE 2022 / 3RD ASHADHA, 1944
                   MACA NO.3749 OF 2019
AGAINST THE COMMON AWARD DTD.25/02/2019 IN OP(MV) 1340/2016
       OF MOTOR ACCIDENTS CLAIMS TRIBUNAL, PALAKKAD
APPELLANT/PETITIONER:

         M .KABEER,
         AGED 53 YEARS
         S/O.MOHAMMED RAWUTHER, THEEPARAMBU, POOTHANNUR,
         MUNDUR, PALAKKAD, KERALA.

         BY ADV BABY MATHEW



RESPONDENT/3RD RESPONDENT:

         IFFCO TOKIO GENERAL INSURANCE CO.LTD.,
         REP. BY ITS MANAGER, PLOT NO.3, SECTOR 29 GURGAON,
         HARYANA - 122 001.
         (INSURER OF CAR BEARING REG.NO.KA-22/P 5344),
         (PROPOSAL NO.P2429119 & 11-11-14) (PERIOD OF
         INSURANCE 13/11/2014 TO 12/11/2015).


     THIS MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS APPEAL HAVING BEEN FINALLY
HEARD ON 24.06.2022, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED
THE FOLLOWING:
 MACA No.3749 of 2019                    2



                         SOPHY THOMAS, J.
                  ------------------------------------
                       M.A.C.A No.3749 of 2019
                  ------------------------------------
              Dated this the 24th day of June, 2022

                             JUDGMENT

This appeal has been preferred by the claimant in

O.P (MV) No.1340 of 2016 on the file of Motor Accidents Claims

Tribunal, Palakkad, challenging the quantum of compensation

awarded under various heads, especially the compensation for

medical expenses.

2. The appellant contended that, he had sustained

concussive head injury, fibular collateral leg bone avulsion right

knee, laceration right knee and he was treated at Paalana

hospital, Palakkad and later at Moulana hospital, Perinthalmanna.

Ext.A14 is the discharge certificate from Paalana hospital and

Ext.A15 is the discharge certificate showing that he was treated

there as an inpatient for five days for concussive head injury.

Ext.A16 is the discharge summary issued from the orthopedic

department of Paalana hospital, Palakkad showing that he was

having fibular collateral leg bony avulsion right knee with

laceration over the right leg. Ext.A17 is the discharge summary

issued from the Moulana hospital, Perinthalmanna showing that

he was treated there as an inpatient for eight days i.e. from

13.09.2015 to 20.09.2015, for disc prolapse. The accident was

on 21.07.2015. According to the appellant, he was admitted in

Moulana hospital, Perinthalmanna for disc prolapse which he had

suffered in connection with the road traffic accident occurred on

21.07.2015.

3. Learned Tribunal, on verifying the medical bills, found

that, the medical bills issued from Moulana hospital for disc

prolapse had no connection with the injuries suffered by the

appellant in the accident. So, the discharge bills produced as

Sl.No.43 and the medical bills issued from Moulana hospital,

Perinthalmanna were not honoured by the Tribunal.

4. The appellant vehemently argued that, he suffered disc

prolapse in connection with the accident only, and he could prove

it by examining the doctor who treated him at Moulana hospital.

For that purpose, he wants to get a chance, for which his prayer

is to remand the case for adducing further evidence.

5. Learned Tribunal, finding that the disc prolapse treated

at Moulana hospital had no connection with the injuries suffered

by the appellant in the accident, not honoured the medical bills

issued from that hospital.

6. If the appellant is so confident that he could prove

through medical evidence that the disc prolapse suffered by him

was consequential to the road traffic accident he had met with, a

chance has to be given to him to prove the same. So the

impugned award of the Tribunal is set aside, and the matter is

remanded for affording an opportunity to the appellant to adduce

additional evidence, if any, to prove his case.

Since this being a case of the year 2016, learned Motor

Accidents Claims Tribunal, Palakkad is directed to dispose the

case within a period of two months from the date of receipt of a

copy of this judgment. The respondent/Insurance Company shall

also be given an opportunity to cross examine the witnesses, if

any, examined from the side of the appellant.

This appeal is disposed of as above. No order as to costs.

Sd/-

SOPHY THOMAS JUDGE smp