ABDUL SAMAD Vs. DIRECTOR SAJ FLIGHT SERVICE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS appeal is filed by the claimant in O.P(M.V.) No. 496/2002 before the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Perumbavoor, claiming enhancement of compensation for the injuries and consequent disabilities suffered by him, on account of an accident involving a vehicle owned by the first respondent, driven by the second respondent and insured with the third respondent. During the pendency of this appeal, the appellant died and his parents and brothers have got themselves impleaded as additional petitioners to prosecute the appeal further. The deceased first appellant filed the O.P. claiming compensation for the injuries and disabilities suffered by him, when the motor cycle driven by him while taking a 'U' turn got itself involved in the accident. Originally the Police registered a case for negligence against the deceased first appellant himself. But on the complaint filed by the first appellant before the superintendent of Police, and the Commissioner of Police the case was directed to be re-investigated by the City Police Commissioner and on re-investigation charge was laid against the driver of the vehicle owned by the first respondent.

(2.) THE Tribunal after considering the evidence available came to the conclusion that the first appellant also contributed to the accident by his negligence and therefore deducted 25% from the compensation awarded holding that to that extent, the first appellant was also negligent in causing the accident. Thereafter the Tribunal awarded compensation under various heads as follows:

(3.) ON the other hand the learned counsel for the Insurance Company would contend that the Tribunal has correctly held that the first appellant was negligent to a major extent in causing the accident. It is submitted that the scene of occurrence and the manner of the occurrence of accident proves beyond doubt, that the first appellant was in fact negligent in driving the motor cycle, which was the cause of the accident. It is also submitted that the Tribunal has correctly assessed the compensation payable, taking into account the correct parameters, which cannot be faulted .