IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE C.N.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE C.K.ABDUL REHIM FRIDAY, THE 31ST JULY 2009 / 9TH SRAVANA 1931 MACA.No. 1012 of 2006() ----------------------- OPMV.1494/2000 of MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS TRIBUNAL, IRINJALAKUDA .................... APPELLANT(S): APPELLANT/PETITIONR IN OP(MV) ------------------------------------------- RANJITH, S/O.THANKAPPAN, PULIYATHOTTATHIL HOUSE, ALOOR P.O., MUKUNDAPURAM TALUK, THRISSUR DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.P.V.BABY RESPONDENT(S): RESPONDENTS IN OP(MV) ------------------------------------ 1. ANTOO P.V., PAYYAPPILLY HOUSE, CHETTIKULAM P.O., KAMMALAM. 2. SUNIL, THANDAMPULLY HOUSE, VELLAMCHIRA P.O., ALOOR. 3. MANAGER, ORIENTAL INSURANCE CO.LTD., CHALAKUDY. ADV. DR.ELIZABETH VARKEY FOR R3 THIS MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS APPEAL HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 31/07/2009 THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: C .N. RAMACHANDRAN NAIR & C. K. ABDUL REHIM, JJ. -------------------------------------------- M.A.C.A. No. 1012 OF 2006 -------------------------------------------- Dated this the 31st day of July, 2009 JUDGMENT Abdul Rehim, J. Appeal is filed by the claimant seeking enhancement of the compensation awarded by the Tribunal. He sustained fracture of both ulna and radius on his right hand in an accident in which the Motorcycle driven by him was hit by an autorickshaw. The Tribunal had granted a total compensation of Rs. 51,641/-. 2. Heard learned counsel appearing for the appellant and standing counsel appearing for the third respondent-insurance company. 3. It is contended by the appellant that the Tribunal went highly erred in adopting the extent of disability as 7%, inspite of production of disability certificate evidencing disability at 12%. It is also contended that the notional income adopted by the Tribunal at Rs. 1500/- per month is highly unrealistic and inadequate. The further contention of the appellant is that the amounts awarded under the heads of pain and 2 suffering and loss of amenities and enjoyment in life are highly on the lower side. Learned standing counsel for the insurance company vehemently opposed the enhancement of compensation contending that the amounts already awarded under different heads are quite reasonable, and also contending that there is no probability for permanent disability, considering the injuries sustained which are only very minor in nature. 4. On evaluating the entire facts and circumstances of the case and evidence on record, we feel that the amounts awarded under different heads like compensation for pain and suffering, loss of amenities and enjoyment in life, compensation for continuing permanent disability, etc., are slightly on the lower side. We feel that enhancement of the total compensation by a further sum of Rs. 15,000/- will be just and reasonable to meet the ends of justice. Learned counsel for the appellant submitted that the rate of interest granted by the Tribunal at 6% is to inadequate. We are inclined to enhance the rate of interest to 7.5% per annum. In the result, appeal is partly allowed enhancing the total 3 compensation of Rs. 51,641/- awarded by the Tribunal by a further sum of Rs. 15,000/-. The original amount of compensation as well as enhancement granted in this appeal will carry interest at 7.5% per annum from the date of the claim petition till payment. The third respondent-insurance company is directed to make payment of the amount within a period of three months. (C.N.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR) Judge. (C. K. ABDUL REHIM) Judge. kk 4