A local man watched his opportunity of being awarded a huge chunk of compensation money over an accident case slip through his fingers after the Ipoh High Court found elements of deception.
Aside from the setting aside the compensation money, the judge also ruled that the Sessions Court judge who awarded the cash had failed to consider “the most credible and direct evidence”, reported NST.
Was struck by a car in 2016
According to the English daily, the victim, L. Ravi, claimed his motorcycle was hit by a car owned by G. Yesu Steven at KM57 of the Ipoh-Kuala Lumpur trunk road at 6.30pm on October 17, 2016.
On the day of the incident, another man named G. Gunalan was driving the car, not Steven himself.
Following the accident, Ravi claimed he sustained severe injuries, including paralysis of the lower limbs. He then filed a police report 90 days later while Gunalan followed suit nine months later.
In 2023, the Sessions Court ruled in Ravi’s favour and awarded him RM1.24 million in damages plus RM44,000 in costs. Neither Gunalan and Steven were called to testify during the trial.
M’sian man loses RM1.2mil compensation over fraudulent claim
However, the Sessions Court’s ruling was immediately met with an appeal by Liberty General Insurance Bhd, the insurance company which had insured Steven’s car involved in the accident.
In court, Appandi Yatim, who represented Liberty General, alleged that fraud and conspiracy had occurred in the case.
Judge Abdul Wahab Mohamed was also inclined to agree, saying that the trial judge “did not correctly assess Ravi’s account of the accident”, most notably police photographic evidence which showed Ravi’s motorcycle rear wasn’t damaged.
On top of that, Ravi’s medical report indicated that he had been alone and had crashed on a slippery road.
Abdul Wahab added that the trial judge also failed to take into consideration evidence which suggested Ravi was intoxicated at the time.
He then overturned the Sessions Court’s decision to award Ravi RM1.24 million in compensation, adding that the trial judge “erred when she found significant evidence immaterial”.
READ ALSO:
