IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE M.N.KRISHNAN TUESDAY, THE 1ST DECEMBER 2009 / 10TH AGRAHAYANA 1931 MACA.No. 2480 of 2009(A) --------------------------- OPMV.623/2001 of MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS TRIBUNAL, TRIVANDRUM .................... APPELLANT(S): APPLICANT ------------------------------ BABU, S/O.VAMADEVAN, PUTHUVAL PUTHEN VEEDU, CHARUMMOODU, KARIKKAKAM, KADAKAMPALLY VILLAGE, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.GOPAKUMAR R.THALIYAL SRI.N.P.PRAJEESH RESPONDENT(S)/RESPONDENTS : -------------------------------------- 1. MITHRA DAS, S/O.VELAYUDHAN, KOCHUMANI VEEDU, OOLANKUZHI DEVI TEMPLE, ANAYARA, KADAKAMPALLY VILLAGE, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM DISTRICT. 2. RAMESH, S/O.MUTHAIYA, KUDAVOOR NABANVILA VEEDU, ANAYARA, KADAKAMPALLY VILLAGE, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM DISTRICT. 3. NEW INDIA ASSURANCE COMPANY LIMITED, BRANCH 2, GOVERNMENT PRESS ROAD, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. ADV. SMT.T.C.SOWMIAVATHY FOR R3 THIS MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS APPEAL HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 01/12/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: M.N. KRISHNAN, J. = = = = = = = = = = = = = = M.A.C.A. NO. 2480 OF 2009 = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = Dated this the 1st day of December, 2009. J U D G M E N T This appeal is preferred against the award of the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Thiruvananthapuram in O.P.(MV) 623/01. The claimant, a 28 year old head load worker, sustained injuries in a road accident and the Tribunal awarded him a compensation of Rs.28,070/-. Dissatisfied with the award the claimant has come up in appeal. 2. Learned counsel for the appellant very strongly contends before me that the Tribunal has erred in fixing a reasonable compensation under the provisions of the Act. A perusal of the award would reveal that the claimant had sustained a lacerated injury of 8 x 1 c.m. bone deep left leg with heel pad avulsion. He was treated as an inpatient in the Medical College Hospital for one day and it appears that he had visited ESI hospital as well as Ayurvedic hospital for further treatment and the Doctor, an Asst. Professor of Orthopedics issued a disability certificate of 3% on account of M.A.C.A. 2480 OF 2009 -:2:- the partial ankylosis of the left ankle joint. The Tribunal fixed the income at Rs.2,000/- and calculated the compensation. I feel considering the worker as a head load worker the Tribunal should have taken at least Rs.2,500/- as his income and when the disability is taken as 3% and a multiplier of 17 is used as per Sarala Varma's case (2009 ACJ 1298(Sarala Varma v. Delhi Transport Corporation) the disability compensation would come to Rs.15,300/- out of which the Tribunal has awarded a compensation of Rs.12,240/- making a difference of Rs.3,060/- under that head. Certainly on account of the place of injury namely ankle and the prolonged treatment he would not have been able to do any work for a period of two months. So at the rate of Rs.2,500/- when it is worked out the claimant is entitled to an additional compensation of Rs.2,000/- under that head. He had undergone treatment in three hospitals and certainly he would have required some medicines, for the purpose I enhance that amount by another Rs.500/-. Similarly towards pain and sufferings also M.A.C.A. 2480 OF 2009 -:3:- I am inclined to enhance the same by Rs.1,000/- thereby making an additional compensation of Rs.6,560/-. In the result the MACA is partly allowed and the claimant is awarded an additional compensation of Rs.6,560/- with 7.5% interest on the said sum from the date of petition till realisation and the insurance company is directed to deposit the same within a period of sixty days from the date of receipt of a copy of the judgment. M.N. KRISHNAN, JUDGE. ul/-