P. RAJU Vs. RASIYA AND ORS.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS appeal is filed by the first respondent before the Tribunal in O.P.(MV) No. 1391/2007. He was impleaded as registered owner of the vehicle involved in the accident. Respondents 1 to 5 herein are the legal heirs of the deceased Shri Nadirsha. He was hit by a motor cycle bearing Reg. No. KL -7/AF 6372 of which the sixth respondent herein was the rider. The deceased was immediately taken to Karothukuzhi Hospital, Aluva and from there to Ernakulam Medical Centre, Palarivattom and was treated there as inpatient. On 2.1.2007 at 3 a.m. he succumbed to the injuries. The Tribunal has granted a total compensation of Rs. 7,98,687/ -.

(2.) BEFORE the Tribunal, R.Ws. 1 to 3 have been examined. R.W.3 was the Manager of the above company. He was summoned to produce certain documents but he has produced only one letter which is marked as Ext. X1.

(3.) LEARNED counsel for the appellant submitted that no evidence has been produced either by Shri Soloman or R.W.3 to show that he had repaid the instalments and got back the vehicle. We have perused the discussion of evidence of R.W.3 also. R.W.3 had produced Ext. X1 letter. The marking of the same was objected to by the appellant and the appellant had disputed the genuineness of it. Even though the evidence of R.W.3 is there, there is nothing worthwhile to show that the amounts have been repaid by the appellant and the vehicle was given back to him. The Tribunal proceeded on the assumption that the appellant being the registered owner, he is bound to satisfy the award.