K.G.NEELAMBARAN, Vs. ISMAIL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The appeal arise from the dismissal of a claim petition seeking compensation for the injuries suffered in an alleged road traffic accident. The appellant in his claim contended that he was travelling pillion in a motor bike while the motor bike was hit by an ambassador car driven by the 1st respondent in a rash and negligent manner. The ambassador car is said to be in the ownership of the 1st respondent. The Insurance company objected to the claim on the ground that the car which was alleged to have hit the bike was not involved in the accident. The Insurance Policy of the car was admitted.

(2.) The appellant was examined as PW1. The specific contention in chief examination was that on 02.04.1998 at about 6 p.m. the accident occurred as stated in the claim petition. It was also deposed that he was traveling pillion and that his brother was driving the scooter. It was admitted that the scooter was registered in the claimant's name but it was also stated that he did not have a license. To a specific question in cross-examination, it was deposed that the scooter was purchased by the claimant so that his brother who was residing with him could carry the claimant to his work place; the claimant being a licensed Government Contractor. Again it was admitted that the brother who was driving the scooter at the time of accident did not have a license. There were also contrary statements made as to the residence of his brother. It was first stated that they were staying separate and in the same breath it was stated that they were residing in the same property ('purayidam').

(3.) Further it was deposed that the claimant was brought to the hospital in a comma; more to explain the wound certificate in which the accident was described as having been caused by a Tempo van. The claimant also did not have a consistent case as to the injuries suffered by his brother who was alleged to be driving the scooter at the time of accident. A feeble attempt was made to say that the brother too was rendered unconscious and was taken to a private hospital. The evidence of PW1 would show that the local people took both the driver and pillion rider to the hospital, but there is no explanation as to why they were taken to different hospitals. The brother had not filed any claim petition and was also not examined before the Tribunal.