UNITED INDIA INSURANCE CO LTD Vs. PAPPU

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This is an appeal preferred against the award of the Claims Tribunal, Perumbavur in OP (MV) No. 360/2004. The claimant sustained injuries and the Tribunal has awarded him a compensation of Rs. 31,700/- and directed the Insurance Company to pay the amount. It is against that decision the Insurance Company has come in appeal challenging these liability as well as the very accident.

(2.) Heard the learned Counsel for the Appellant as well as the Respondent.

(3.) The learned Counsel for the Insurance Company would contend that as per the wound certificate and other case records the cause of injury is given as on account of overturning a tempo van. It is also contended that the First Information Report was registered only in 2004 and therefore, there is no explanation for the delay. On the other hand, learned Counsel for the claimant, would contend that the claimant is a 53 year old man and he do not have much idea about the vehicles. Originally he was admitted as an out patient in the hospital and subsequently, when it aggravated he was readmitted. On 30.7.2003 itself he has preferred a private complaint before the Magistrate Court giving the correct description of the vehicle involved which was an autorickshaw. It is true that it took a long time for Court and the authorities to act upon and register the crime. Subsequently, a charge sheet has also been filed. So the investigating part of the case done by the investigating agency, would point out that the vehicle involved was an auto rickshaw and it overturned resulting in the accident. The mere recital in the wound certificate cannot be substitute for evidence and do other materials are forthcoming to substantiate the contention raised by the Insurance Company. On the other hand, the claimant had examined himself as PW1 and also PW2. These two witnesses support the case of the claimant with respect to the involvement of the autorickshaw in the accident. So the only piece of document which may go against the claimant is the recital in the wound certificate. It cannot be taken as a conclusive material, especially when PW1 and PW2 and the investigating agency had stated how the accident had taken place. Therefore, I am not prepared to accept the contention of the Insurance company regarding the fact that the accident took place when the tempo van overturned. I do not find any reason to interfere with the Tribunal on that point.