IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE C.N.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE HARUN-UL-RASHID TUESDAY, THE 11TH NOVEMBER 2008 / 20TH KARTHIKA 1930 MACA.No. 1305 of 2004 ----------------------- OPMV.519/1998 of MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS TRIBUNAL, TIRUR .................... APPELLANT/3RD RESPONDENT IN THE O.P(MV): ----------------------------------------------------- NEW INDIA ASSURANCE COMPANY, ANUGRAHA BUILDINGS, VADAKKANCHERRY ROAD, KUNNAMKULAM, REPRESENTED BY THE ASSISTANT ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICER, NEW INDIA ASSURANCE CO., REGIONAL OFFICE, KANDAMKULATHY TOWERS, M.G.ROAD, ERNAKULAM. BY ADV. SRI.LAL GEORGE RESPONDENT/CLAIMANT & RESPONDENTS 1 & 2 IN THE OP(MV): ------------------------------------------------------------------------ 1. ISHA HAQUE, AGED 8 YEARS (MINOR), REPRESENTED BY FATHER GUARDIAN IBRAHIM, S/O. SAIDALAVI, THEKKEPEEDIKAKKAL HOUSE, PAINKANNUR, VALANCHERY. 2. U.A.GOPI, S/O. APPUKUTTAN, THIRUNELLUR, THRISSUR DISTRICT. 3. MARY JOSEPH, W/O. JOSEPH, AREKAT HOUSE, THIRUVELLUR, THRISSUR DISTRICT. R1 BY ADV. SRI.K.P.MUJEEB THIS MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS APPEAL HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 11/11/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: C .N. RAMACHANDRAN NAIR & HARUN-UL-RASHID, JJ. -------------------------------------------- M.A.C.A. No. 1305 OF 2004 -------------------------------------------- Dated this the 11th day of November, 2008 JUDGMENT Ramachandran Nair,J. Appeal is filed by the insurance company challenging the award of the MACT directing it to pay compensation to the first respondent for the injury sustained by her in a road accident. The first ground raised is against grant of separate compensation for permanent disability and for loss of earning power. We find force in this contention because a Full Bench of this Court in ORIENTAL INSURANCE CO. V. HARIPRASAD, (2005) 4 K.L.T. 977 held that separate compensation cannot be granted under the above two heads. In this case, it is seen that the Tribunal has without even a claim granted a compensation of Rs. 50,000/- for loss of amenities in life. Of course first respondent has suffered head injury and after the accident he is left with small limbing. Therefore there is nothing wrong in Tribunal granting compensation voluntarily for loss of amenities in life and for disfiguration in the form of shortening of leg. Therefore the 2 compensation granted under this head will stand confirmed. However, since there is no justification for granting separate compensation for permanent disability and for loss of earning power, we reduce the compensation granted under these two heads by Rs. 45,000/-. Even though enhancement of percentage of disability from 10% certified by the doctor to 25% is not justified, we do not think we should interfere with the award because it is a case where a 8 year old boy suffered head injury and remained unconscious for a long period. Considering the nature of injury and the drowsiness exhibited by the injured even after recovery, Tribunal was justified in estimating the percentage of disability at 25%. Appeal stands allowed only in part by reducing the compensation amount by Rs. 45,000/- with proportionate reduction in interest. (C.N.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR) Judge. (HARUN-UL-RASHID) Judge. kk 3