SUNIL Vs. MUNAVARUDHEEN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Inadequacy of the compensation awarded by the Tribunal in respect of the injuries sustained by the appellant in a road traffic accident occurred on 26.06.2010 is the subject matter of this appeal.

(2.) The factual position revealed from the proceedings is that the appellant was proceeding on a motor cycle bearing No.KL.45/A/9044, riding the same with another person (claimant in O.P.(MV) No.1141 of 2010) on the pillion. When they reached the place of occurrence, a lorry bearing No.KL.06/D/7222 driven by the first respondent before the Tribunal and insured by the second respondent allegedly applied the brake abruptly in the attempt to take a right turn, upon which the motor cycle hit against the rear side of the lorry resulting in injuries to both the riders.

(3.) On filing claim petition before the Tribunal, despite the completion of service of notice, the first respondent did not turn up and was set ex parte. The second respondent/insurer admitted the policy, however disputed the liability on various grounds. The evidence adduced before the Tribunal consists of Exts.A1 to A14, besides the oral deposition of P.Ws.1 to 3. Based on the evidence adduced, the Tribunal held that the accident was because of the negligence on the part of the rider of the motor cycle, ie. the appellant herein and also of the first respondent and accordingly, the ratio was fixed at 50:50. Awarding amounts under different heads, the total compensation was fixed as Rs 434050/ -. But based on the negligence fixed to an extent of 50%, only a sum of Rs.217030/ - was ordered to be satisfied with interest at the rate of 7.5% per annum from the date of petition, till realisation. The appellant is aggrieved of the course and proceedings pursued by the Tribunal and hence the appeal