HAJJA P M Vs. K A PAULOSE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE appellant was while participating in a procession, hit from behind by a car and he sustained injuries. His claim petition for compensation was dismissed on the ground that he did not produce necessary document to show that the first respondent driver was negligent. When it is a case of hit from behind necessarily it shall be taken that there was negligence from the hands of the driver of the car who ought to have shown very much care and deligence when a procession is going in front of the vehicle. Thus this is a case where accident speaks by itself to show that the driver was negligent. But regarding the compensation payable to the appellant the tribunal found that there was no evidence produced by the appellant. It was contended that the appellant was at that time undergoing treatment and that there was ailments to his kidney as a result of the accident. He had also sustained other serious injuries, he submit. That was the reason why he could not adduce any evidence. Accordingly we set aside the award in M.V.O.P. 68/91 and find that there was negligence on the part of the first respondent and remand the case for fresh trial where the parties will be entitled to produce evidence. THE tribunal shall within six months dispose of the case. THE parties shall appear before the tribunal below on 14.1.2003. Appeal is allowed.