K.J.JESTINE Vs. K.PRASAD
LAWS(KER)-2013-9-57
HIGH COURT OF KERALA
Decided on September 05,2013

K.J.Jestine Appellant
VERSUS
K.PRASAD Respondents




JUDGEMENT

Thomas P. Joseph, J. - (1.)Respondents 1 to 3 are served but there is no response. The 4th respondent appears through counsel. The appeal arises from the award dated 01.01.2010 in O.P. (MV) No. 1609 of 2005 of the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Ernakulam (for short, "the Tribunal"). The appellant claimed that on 24.01.2005 at about 9.10 a.m., while riding a motor cycle bearing No. KL-7/AE-5950 along the Perandur-Thammanam road and he reached place of the accident, another motor cycle bearing registration No. KL-7/AT-3346 (for short, "the offending vehicle") came from behind and hit the motor cycle which the appellant was riding. The appellant suffered fracture of the tibia and fibula, underwent inpatient treatment in Lisie Hospital, Ernakulam until 31.01.2005 and continued outpatient treatment. He claimed compensation from the respondents, owner-cum-rider of the offending vehicle and its insurer (respondents 1 and 2, respectively) The 3rd and 4th respondents are the owner and insurer of the motor cycle which the appellant was riding at the relevant time.
(2.)The 3rd respondent remained absent in the Tribunal. The other respondents contested the claim petition. They denied the accident. The Tribunal held that the accident as pleaded by the appellant is not proved, that it is a 'self accident' and consequently, without going into the quantum of compensation payable to the appellant, the claim petition was dismissed. Hence the appeal.
(3.)The learned counsel for the appellant has contended that finding of the Tribunal regarding the accident is erroneous. It is argued that even if the view taken by the Tribunal is accepted, there is an 'accident' arising out of the use of a motor cycle and hence the Tribunal should have awarded compensation.


Click here to view full judgement.
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.