Rajan Pillai.G vs Jomon James
2025 Latest Caselaw 8935 Ker

Kerala High Court

Rajan Pillai.G vs Jomon James on 18 September, 2025

                                                         2025:KER:70389
MACA No.2730/2018
                                    ..1..

               IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

                                  PRESENT

           THE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE SHOBA ANNAMMA EAPEN

    THURSDAY, THE 18TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER 2025 / 27TH BHADRA, 1947

                        MACA NO. 2730 OF 2018

   OPMV NO.868 OF 2014 OF ADDITIONAL ADDITIONAL MACT, ALAPPUZHA

APPELLANT/PETITIONER:

            RAJAN PILLAI.G., AGED 52 YEARS
            S/O GOVINDAN NAIR, CHAITHANYAM VEEDU (MEENATHUVILA
            KIZHAKKATHIL), KAVUMPAD WARD, ERUMAKUZHY MURY, NOORANAD
            P.O., PALAMEL VILLEGE, MAVELIKKARA THALUK.

            BY ADV SRI.RASHEED C.NOORANAD


RESPONDENTS/RESPONDENTS:

     1      JOMON JAMES, S/O JAMES, MATTUMMAKATHU HOUSE,
            PERINGASSERY, THODUPUZHA, PIN- 685 595

     2      RAJAN, S/O.KUTTAPPAN, REJINI NILAYAM, HOUSE NO.27/243
            TMC, VENGALLOOR P.O., THODUPUZHA, PIN-685608

     3      THE MANAGER,
            UNITED INDIA ASSURANCE CO.LTD., THODUPUZHA

            BY ADVS.
            SRI.R.LAIJU
            SRI.R.GIREESH VARMA



     THIS MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS APPEAL HAVING COME UP FOR HEARING
ON 18.09.2025, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
                                                                 2025:KER:70389
MACA No.2730/2018
                                       ..2..




                                 JUDGMENT

The appellant was the claimant in OP(MV) No. 868 of 2014 on

the file of the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Mavelikkara. The

respondents herein were the respondents before the tribunal.

2. The case of the appellant/claimant is that on

24.10.2013, while he was pillion riding on a motorcycle bearing

Reg.No.KL-31-6932 along the Adoor - Sasthamkotta public road, an

LMV goods carriage driven by the first respondent in a rash and

negligent manner, knocked him down, whereby he sustained serious

injuries. He approached the tribunal claiming a total compensation of

₹3,30,000/-.

3. Respondents 1 and 2/driver and owner of the offending

vehicle remained ex parte before the tribunal. The third respondent

insurer filed a written statement admitting the policy coverage for the

offending vehicle, but denying negligence on the part of the first

respondent and disputing the quantum of compensation claimed. The

tribunal, after analysing the pleadings and materials on record, held

that the accident took place on account of the negligence of the rider of 2025:KER:70389

..3..

the offending vehicle and awarded a sum of ₹33,500/- as compensation

under various heads against the third respondent being the insurer.

Dissatisfied with the quantum of compensation awarded by the tribunal,

the claimant has come up in appeal.

4. Pending appeal, along with IA No.1 of 2023 and memo

dated 28.07.2025, the appellant produced additional documents to

prove the expenses incurred for the treatment undergone in connection

with the injuries and the percentage of disability sustained by him in the

accident, and sought for an opportunity to raise additional claims before

the tribunal.

5. The learned counsel for the appellant submits that the

appellant sustained serious injuries in the accident and was under

treatment for almost four years, however, though the claim petition was

filed, he could not produce the medical bills as well as the disability

certificate before the tribunal and agitate the claim in an effective

manner. It is further submitted that the compensation awarded by the

tribunal is on the lower side, and hence, he sought for an enhancement

of the compensation.

6. The learned Standing Counsel for the third respondent

insurer, on the other hand, submits that the accident was in 2013 and 2025:KER:70389

..4..

appellant did not produce even a single medical bill before the tribunal

and hence, the claim now put forward is not allowable. It is further

submitted that the tribunal, on the basis of the documents produced,

awarded a reasonable compensation.

7. I have considered the rival contentions raised on both

sides. On a perusal of the impugned award, it is seen that the

documents produced before the tribunal as Exts.A1 to A5 do not include

the medical bills and the disability certificate now produced before this

Court. A perusal of the said medical bills shows that they are issued

from 24.10.2013 onwards, which reveals a failure on the part of the

appellant to produce before the tribunal. The reasons stated in the

affidavit filed in support of IA No.1 of 2023 is that though the learned

counsel appearing for the claimant sought time before the tribunal to

produce additional documents, the tribunal marked only Exts.A1 to A5

and posted the case for hearing to 24.02.2018, and since the learned

counsel was absent on that day, the tribunal adjourned the matter to

28.02.2018 for judgment and awarded only a meagre amount. I do not

find force in the said contentions, for the reason that the petition was

filed in 2013 and the case was posted for hearing only in 2018.

8. The disability certificate dated 04.07.2017, which is 2025:KER:70389

..5..

produced before this Court, along with IA No.1 of 2023, shows that the

appellant sustained 30% disability. The learned Standing Counsel for

the respondent insurer objected to the said interlocutory application,

stating that the disability certificate was issued by a single doctor.

However, considering the afore facts, I am of the opinion that the

appellant can be given one more opportunity to prove his case by

adducing evidence, for enhancement of compensation before the

tribunal, giving him an opportunity to produce all documents including

the medical bills and the disability certificate.

Therefore, the appeal is disposed of as follows;

A. The matter is remitted back to the tribunal for reconsideration

and enhancement of the compensation already awarded by the

tribunal.

B. The parties are directed to appear before the tribunal on

05.11.2025

C. The appellant will be at liberty to produce additional documents

including the documents produced before this Court in appeal,

for claiming enhancement of compensation. Both parties shall

be afforded an opportunity to adduce fresh evidence.

D. Since the accident is of the year 2013, the tribunal shall 2025:KER:70389

..6..

consider the matter as expeditiously as possible, at any rate,

within a period of six months from the date of receipt of a

certified copy of this judgment.

E. Registry is directed to return the additional original documents

to the appellant, enabling him to produce the same before the

tribunal.

Sd/-

SHOBA ANNAMMA EAPEN JUDGE bka/-