The importance of properly evaluating evidence and considering medical evidence and criminal case records in motor accident claims.

Abdul Rehim, J.

The above appeal picturises a splendid example wherein the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal has imported its own pre-conceived notions and presumptions in discarding the evidence on record and in rejecting the claim instituted by a helpless lady at the age of 40 years, who sustained injuries in a motor vehicle accident.

2. The appellant herein is the claimant in OP (MV) No.1069/2004 on the files of the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Attingal. She approached the Tribunal seeking compensation to the extent of Rs.1,10,000/- for the injuries sustained to her in a motor vehicle accident, which allegedly occurred at 11.30 a.m. on 26-07-2003 near L.P. School, Anoopara at Alayilmukku-Avanavancherry Public Road. The allegation in the claim petition is that, while walking along the side of the above said road she was knocked down by a scooter bearing Registration No. KL 01 Q 2833 driven by the 2nd respondent at a rash and negligent manner at excessive speed. The claim was resisted by the 3rd respondent by filing written statement wherein a contention was taken that no accident of the description as mentioned in the claim had never taken place indeed. According to the 3rd respondent the claimant is seen to have got injured in some other incident and she has approached the Tribunal with a false claim to extract money from the 3rd respondent Insurance Company. In support of such contention it was pointed out that there occurred unreasonable delay of 297 days in reporting the occurrence to the police and the police had registered the case only on the basis of a private complaint filed by the claimant before the Judicial First Class Magistrate Court-I, Attingal, which was forwarded by that court to the Attingal Police, under Section 156 (3) of Code of Criminal Procedure. It was also contended that the respondents 1 & 2 are colluding with the claimant in filing the application seeking compensation.

3. While adjudicating the issue as to whether the claimant had sustained bodily injury in an accident as alleged and as to whether the 2nd respondent was rash and negligent in causing such an accident, the Tribunal found that;

"it can be seen that, the petitioner-claimant sustained grievous bodily injuries some day prior to the date of accident, perhaps years before, and she is seen to have got involved in some minor accident, or incident in the year 2003, or rather about the date of alleged accident, and she is seen to have made an attempt to make it appear that, the consequences of the previous injury, indeed as consequence of the minor bodily injuries, evidently sustained by her in a subsequent accident, or incident. That being so, the petitioner-claimant has not succeeded in proving her case that, she sustained fracture humerous right in the accident as averred in the petition, hence she is found not entitled to compensation prayed for."

4. For the purpose of brevity, we are not venturing to re-produce the discussions made by the Tribunal on evaluating the evidence on record. However, we are persuaded to observe that, there is total perversity in properly evaluating the evidence and in arriving at any just and proper findings based on the evidence. We are at an obligation to conduct a re-evaluation of the entire evidence adduced by the appellant. Exhibit A1 to A4 are documents pertaining to the police case registered with respect to the accident. Exhibit A4 is the copy of the wound certificate issued from Attingal Multi-specialty Hospital. It would indicate that on 26-07-2003 the petitioner was brought to the said hospital at 12 noon with a history and alleged cause of the injury as sustained by hit of a Scooter at 11.30 a.m. while walking through the road at Anoopara. The injuries noted therein is pain and restricted movement of right hand and deformity. In the wound certificate it is noted that on examination, fracture of humerus was detected. Exhibit A4 contains an endorsement that the patient was referred to the Medica