SRI. JIMMY KORAH (PRESIDENT)
Filed on 24/09/2008
Complainant’s case is as follows:- The complainant, on 29th January 1999 met with a road accident. The motor accident claim case as to this was entrusted to the opposite party. The opposite party is a lawyer practicing in Alappuzha. The complainant waited for a long ten years, still no any useful steps to file the complainant’s case was taken by the opposite party. In the mean time the complainant called on the opposite party several times and sought to know about the fate of his case. The complainant gave hollow assurances with regard to the complainant’s claim case. The complainant had to walk to and fro time and again. The complainant eventually learned that no case has been filed by the opposite party for the complaint. There is deficiency of service on the part of the opposite party. Got aggrieved on this, the complainant approached this Forum.
2. Notice was sent. The opposite party did not turn up. With the result, he was set exparte.
3. The complainant filed proof affidavit and the documents Exbts. Al and A2 were marked. Exbt. Al is the medical certificate issued by Dr. B.P.Raj Mohan and A2 is the medical report.
4. Keeping in view the contentions raised by the complainant, the questions
arise for consideration are:-
(a) Whether there is deficiency of service on the part of the opposite party?
(b) Whether the complainant is entitled to the relief sought for?
5. We carefully went through the materials placed before us. As we have already observed, the opposite party did not make it a point to appear before this Forum. Going by the evidence led by the complainant it is indisputable that the complainant met with an accident and underwent treatment in the hospital. The complainant's contention is that he entrusted the case to the opposite party. Barring a bare statement as to this, seemingly no material is forth coming to show that the complainant assigned the case to the opposite party or if the opposite party accepted the same. The same is left to the surmise of this Forum. However the opposite party was disinclined to come before this Forum to offer his version against the case of the complainant. In this co text, we have no other course open, but to take into account the contentions advanced by the complainant.
6. We must observe that the complainant could have procured the documents if any handed over to him and take steps to file the application for claim much earlier, as soon as he learned about the limpness on the part of the opposite party in advancing his case .. Incidentally, there is no limitation for filing the application for claim before the tribunal, and still the complainant is not ill-equipped for filing the said application for claim before the Motor Accident Claim Tribunal.
7. In view of the discussions made herein before, we direct the opposite party to hand over the documents to the complainant if any collected from him forthwith. In so far as no deficiency of service was brought out in the instant case, we are disinclined to allow any amount as compensation. However an amount of Rs.1000/- ( Rupees one thousand only) is ordered to be paid by the opposite party to the complainant towards cost. The opposite party shall comply with the order within 30 days of receipt of this order.
In the result, to the said extent the complaint is allowed accordingly.
Pronounced in open Forum on this the 28th day of October, 2009.
Sd/- Sri. Jimmy Korah:
Sd/- Sri. K. Anirudhan:
Sd/- Smt.N.Shajitha Beevi:
Appendix:-
Evidence of the complainant:-
Ext.A1 - Medical Certificate issued by Dr.B.P.Raj Mohan
Ext.A2 - Medical Report
Evidence of the opposite party:- Nil
// True Copy // By Order
To Senior Superintendent
Complainant/Opposite party/S.F.
Typed by:-pr/- Compared by:-
