IMPORTANT POINT
Death in motor accident – Merely by reason of proximity of accident and death or possibility of acute myocardial infarction occurring for reason of a long bed rest, it cannot be assumed, without clear evidence to substantiate death having been caused as a result of injuries sustained in accident that death occurred by reason of accident.

JUDGMENT :

K. VINOD CHANDRAN, J.

1. The claimants before the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal¹[for short, ‘the Tribunal’] were the wife, minor child and the mother of an Excise Guard, who died, allegedly as a result of a motor vehicle accident. The accident occurred on 29.04.2006 when the motorcycle driven by the deceased collided with another motorcycle, owned and driven by the fourth respondent. The accident occurred at about 9 am and the injured victim was taken to a nearby hospital for treatment. The victim was treated as an inpatient from 29.04.2006 till 03.05.2006 and discharged. The injuries suffered by him were compound fracture of second, third and fourth metatarsals of right foot and a simple fracture of the proximal phalanx of left little finger. He also sustained a wound at the fracture site.

2. After getting discharged, the treatment continued as an outpatient till 12.08.2006, subsequent to which he was referred to a higher medical centre for plastic surgery consultation. On 18.09.2006, the victim was admitted to the higher medical centre with a non-healing ulcer on the right foot. The victim was advised to undergo a surgery after which he abruptly died. The cause of death was pulmonary embolism/acute myocardial infarction. The death occurred on 18.09.2006, almost five months after the date of the accident. The Tribunal found the death to be a direct consequence of the accident which finding was overturned by the High Court. The appeal is by the claimants against the judgment of the High Court.

3. The factum of the accident and the death is undisputed. The controversy arose insofar as the death occurred after five months; whether the accident was a direct causation of the death. The High Court has elaborately considered the evidence of PW-1, the plastic surgeon who carried out the surgical procedure and found the death to be not a direct cause of the accident.

4. We first looked at the order of the Tribunal which was specifically emphasised by Mr. Shaji P. Chaly, learned Senior Counsel appearing for the appellant. The Tribunal found merit in the submissions of the claimants that the non- healing ulcer on the right foot was consequent to the injuries sustained by the victim in the motor accident. The Tribunal also observed that the injuries sustained by the deceased victim were not so serious and though the deceased had undergone grafting of skin in the local hospital on two occasions, the injuries did not heal which prompted the reference to a higher centre for plastic surgery consultation; the local hospital having found themselves unable to further manage the medical condition. The surgery was carried out at the higher medical centre and the patient was shifted to post operative ward at 12:50 pm on 21.09.2006 but at 04:45 pm he developed sudden breathlessness and restlessness. Exhibit A-1, the certificate issued by the plastic surgeon, who was examined as PW-1 clearly reported the cause of death as pulmonary embolism/acute myocardial infarction.

5. PW-1 affirmed Exhibit A-1 and the Tribunal found that the proximity of the accident in which the injuries were sustained, with the death, clearly showed the nexus between the accident and the death. It was also found that the cross-examination of PW-1 did not elicit any contra indication and there was neither any heart complaint nor hypertension or diabetics. It was hence the Tribunal found the death to be a direct result of the injuries sustained in the accident.

6. The High Court by the impugned judgment elaborately considered the evidence of PW-1. PW-1 while affirming Exhibit A-1 certificate, deposed that the surgery was conducted by reason of the non-healing ulcer and the skin grafting was done on 21.09.2006 under spinal anaesthesia. The patient was shifted to the ward at 12:50 pm after which he becomes breathless and restless and eventually succumbed at 04:45 pm on the same day. The cause of death was stated to be as seen from Exhibit A-1.

7. In chief examination, he also