K T ANTONY Vs. MARY D CUNHA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Appellant is the respondent in OP(MV)No.1650 of 2000 on the file of MACT, Ernakulam. Respondent filed objection contending that on 8.2.2000 at about 2.45 pm while he was walking through the road from south to north near Vaduthala school, scooter KL-7/B 9304 which was driven by the appellant hit him and caused fracture and he was treated as an inpatient at Lourdes Hospital, Ernakulam and the accident was caused due to the negligent driving of the scooter by the appellant. A compensation of Rs.60,000/- was claimed. Appellant filed a written statement not admitting the accident and contending that accident was not due to his negligence and that the amount claimed is excessive. The Tribunal on the evidence of the respondent as PW1 and Exts.A1 to A8 granted a compensation of Rs.12,000/-. This appeal is filed challenging the same.

(2.) Learned counsel appearing for the appellant and respondent were heard. The argument of the learned counsel appearing for the appellant was that as the case was transferred from MACT to Addl.MACT, appellant was not aware of the posting date and therefore he could not contest the case and hence the case may be remanded.

(3.) On going through the award passed by the Tribunal and the documents produced by the respondent, I do not find that a remand is warranted. The wound certificate produced by the respondent shows that respondent was brought to Hospital by none other than the appellant himself. It also reveals that respondent sustained injury when the Bajaj Scooter of the appellant hit him near Vaduthala School at about 2.45 pm as contended by the respondent. It also shows that X-ray revealed the fracture of colle's(left) and he was treated as inpatient at Lourdes Hospital from 8.1.2000 to 10.1.2000. The Claims Tribunal awarded only a compensation of Rs.12,000/-, which cannot be said to be excessive at all. Appeal is therefore dismissed.