P.S.KRISHNAN Vs. T.M.JOY

JUDGEMENT

(1.) M.A.C.A.No.1069/2005 was filed by the petitioner, while M.A.C.A.No.1717/2005 was filed by the 4th respondent Insurance Company in one of the vehicle involved in the accident against the award passed in O.P.(MV)No.966/2003 on the file of the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Ottappalam. The claim petition was filed by the injured for compensation for the personal injuries sustained him in a motor vehicle accident occurred on 26.07.2002 at 9.00 a.m., at Kallipadam, while he was travelling in the maruti van with No.KL -9K/2482 owned by the 3rd respondent, driven by the

(2.) nd respondent and insured with the 4th respondent, which collided with an ambassador car with No.KL -R/8099 owned and driven by the first respondent which came from the opposite direction. According to the petitioner in the claim petition, the accident occurred due to the negligence of both the drivers. He sustained severe injuries. He was working as a salesman in a shop and getting 4,000/ - per month, who was aged only 47 years at that time and on account of the injury, he sustained permanent disability incapacitating from doing any work. So he claimed a total compensation of 4,00,000/ - on various heads. 2. The first respondent entered appearance and filed counter admitting that he was the owner cum driver of the ambassador car involved in the accident, but denied negligence on his part. According to him he was proceeding from west to east and when the car reached place of occurrence, a dog suddenly crossed the road from south to north and at that time, the maruti van coming from the opposite direction at high speed swerved to the right, and on seeing the same, he had to swerve his vehicle to his opposite side and at that process the maruti van hit against the ambassador car and there was no negligence on his part and the accident occurred due to the negligence of the 2nd respondent alone and he is not liable to pay any compensation.

(3.) Respondents 2 and 3 remained absent.