SIVAN PILLAI Vs. GOPINATHAN & ORS.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The appellant is the petitioner in O.P(MV)No.21/2004 of the 1st Additional Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Kollam. The above original petition was filed under section 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988, claiming a sum of Rs. 1,50,000/-, as compensation for the bodily injury suffered by him in a road traffic accident. The appellant was a driver by profession and he was employed under KSRTC. According to him, while he was driving a super fast bus belonging to KSRTC, the offending lorry driven by the 2nd respondent, owned by the 1st respondent and insured with the 3rd respondent came from the opposite direction and hit against the bus causing severe injuries to him. Thus, the accident arose out of the careless use of the offending vehicle and caused by rash and negligent driving of the offending vehicle by the 2nd respondent.

(2.) The respondents 1 to 4 remained ex-parte and the 4th respondent insurer of the KSRTC bus denied the liability on the ground that the petitioner has no cause of action against the 5th respondent and the accident was caused by rash and negligent driving of the KSRTC bus by the petititoner. In evidence, Exts.A1 to A7 were marked. Though the respondents against whom the appellant had claimed compensation remained ex-parte, the Tribunal considered the question whether the accident occurred due to the negligence of the 2nd respondent in driving the above lorry and found against the appellant/petitioner and dismissed the original petition, at the threshold, on a finding that the accident occurred due to the rash and negligent driving of the KSRTC bus by the appellant/petitioner himself. The legality and correctness of the dismissal of the petition on the above finding are challenged in this appeal.

(3.) Heard the learned counsel for the appellant and the learned counsel appearing for the 1st, 2nd, 3rd, and 5th respondents.