Yesudas vs Dhanesh

Type Court Judgment Court Kerala Decided Mar 07, 2025

~2 min read

https://sooperkanoon.com/case/1280625

For advocates & juniors · 7-day free trial

Brief this judgment before chambers

Stop skimming 50 pages - get an 18-section AI Brief on this case, ask scoped follow-ups, and find related precedents with Semantic Search. Full trial, no card required.

18-section brief - facts, issues, ratio, relief
Ask this case - answers cite the judgment
Semantic search - find precedents by meaning
Research drawer - sections, cites, related cases

Citation: sooperkanoon.com/1280625
Court: Kerala High Court
Judge: Honourable Mr. Justice C.Pratheep Kumar
Decided On: Mar 07, 2025
Case Number: MACA/1179/2017
Subject: Land Acquisition

Case Summary

AI-generated summary - not the official court judgment text.

Land Acquisition

Key legal issue: Land Acquisition

Parties & Advocates

Appellant / Petitioner

Yesudas

Respondent

Dhanesh

Excerpt

.....motor accident claims appeal having been finally heard on 07.03.2025, the court on the same day delivered the following: maca no. 1179 of 2017 2judgmentdated this the 7th day of march, 2025 the petitioner in o.p.(m.v.) no. 555/2010 on the file of the motor accident claims tribunal, north paravur, is the appellant herein. (for the purpose of convenience, the parties are hereafter referred to as per their rank before the tribunal).2. the petitioner filed the above o.p. under section 166 of themotor vehicles act, 1988, claiming compensation for the injuries sustained in a motor vehicle accident that occurred on 31.05.2009. the tribunal found that, the petitioner himself was responsible for the accident and as such the claim petition was dismissed.3. aggrieved by the order by the tribunal, the petitioner preferred this appeal.4. heard sri.manasy. t, the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner/appellant, sri.a.n santhosh, the learned counsel for the 2 nd respondent and smt. deepa george, the learned standing counsel for the 3rd respondent.5. as per ext.a1 charge sheet, it can be seen that the police registered the above case and found after investigation that the accident maca no. 1179 of 2017 3occurred due to the negligence of the petitioner himself. it was in the above context that the tribunal dismissed the claim petition. the petitioner has not adduced any evidence to the contrary so as to disbelieve ext.a1charge sheet filed by the police. in the above circumstance, the tribunal was perfectly justified in dismissing the claim petition. i do not find any grounds to interference with the same and as such, this appeal is devoid of any merits, and it is dismissed. sd/- c. pratheep kumar, judge vnk/-

Full Judgment

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

PRESENT THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE C.PRATHEEP KUMAR FRIDAY, THE 7TH DAY OF MARCH 2025 / 16TH PHALGUNA, 1946 MACA NO. 1179 OF 2017 AGAINST THE AWARD DATED 23.10.2014 IN OPMV NO.555 OF 2010 OF ADDITIONAL DISTRICT COURT & MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS TRIBUNAL, NORTH PARAVUR APPELLANT: YESUDAS S/O.GEORGE, CHALEPARAMBIL HOUSE, THUNDATHUMKADAVU, VARAPPUZHA VILLAGE, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT. BY ADV SMT.T.MANASY RESPONDENTS: 1 DHANESH S/O.SEKAHARAN, H.NO.6/246/C, KADDUKKAMPALLOM HOUSE, KAITHARAM, N.PARAVUR - 683 513. 2 SAIRAJ S/O.RAJAPPAN, ANCHIL HOUSE, EZHIKKARA P.O., N.PARAVUR - 683 513. 3 UNITED INDIA INSURANCE COMPANY LTD. VETTUKATTIL BUILDING, M.G.ROAD, ERNAKULAM - 682 016. BY ADVS SRI. A.N SANTHOSH- R2 SMT. DEEPA GEORGE- SC THIS MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS APPEAL HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 07.03.2025, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: MACA NO. 1179 OF 2017 2

JUDGMENT

Dated this the 7th day of March, 2025 The petitioner in O.P.(M.V.) No. 555/2010 on the file of the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, North Paravur, is the appellant herein. (For the purpose of convenience, the parties are hereafter referred to as per their rank before the Tribunal).

2. The petitioner filed the above O.P. under Section 166 of the

Motor Vehicles Act, 1988, claiming compensation for the injuries sustained in a motor vehicle accident that occurred on 31.05.2009. The Tribunal found that, the petitioner himself was responsible for the accident and as such the claim petition was dismissed.

3. Aggrieved by the order by the Tribunal, the petitioner preferred this appeal.

4. Heard Sri.Manasy. T, the learned Counsel appearing for the petitioner/appellant, Sri.A.N Santhosh, the learned Counsel for the 2 nd respondent and Smt. Deepa George, the learned Standing Counsel for the 3rd respondent.

5. As per Ext.A1 charge sheet, it can be seen that the Police registered the above case and found after investigation that the accident MACA NO. 1179 OF 2017 3

occurred due to the negligence of the petitioner himself. It was in the above context that the Tribunal dismissed the claim petition. The petitioner has not adduced any evidence to the contrary so as to disbelieve Ext.A1charge sheet filed by the Police. In the above circumstance, the Tribunal was perfectly justified in dismissing the claim petition. I do not find any grounds to interference with the same and as such, this appeal is devoid of any merits, and it is dismissed. Sd/- C. PRATHEEP KUMAR, JUDGE vnk/-

Same Court & Year Kerala · 2025 Same Parties Yesudas vs Dhanesh Same Subject Land Acquisition Same Judge Honourable Mr. Justice C.Pratheep Kumar