IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE M.N.KRISHNAN TUESDAY, THE 28TH OCTOBER 2008 / 6TH KARTHIKA 1930 MACA.No. 1722 of 2007(F) -------------------------------- OPMV.1135/1999 of MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS TRIBUNAL, KOLLAM .................... APPELLANT : -------------- SURENDRAN NAIR, SON OF NEELAKANTA PILLAI PATAKASSERIL VEEDU, THRIKKUNNAPUZHA, SOORANAD SOUTH, KUNNATHOOR TALUK. BY ADV. SRI.P.C.CHACKO(PARATHANAM) RESPONDENTS : ------------------- 1. RAJESH, SON OF SOMASEKHARA KURUP, SREENILAYAM, ERAVICHIRA NADUVIL, PATHARAM P.O., SOORANADU SOUTH. 2. SURENDRA KURUP, SON OF DAMODARAN PILLAI, THADATHIL VADAKKATHIL, INCHAKKADU,SOORANADU TALUK. 3. DIVISIONAL MANAGER, NEW INDIA ASSURANCE COMPANY LIMITED, KOLLAM. ADV. SRI.LAL GEORGE THIS MOTOR ACCIDENTCLAIMS APPEAL HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 28/10/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: M.N.KRISHNAN, J. -------------------------- M.A.C.A No. 1722 OF 2007 --------------------- Dated this the 28th day of October, 2008 JUDGMENT This appeal is preferred against the award passed by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Kollam, in OP(MV) 1135/99. The claimant sustained injuries in a road accident and the Tribunal awarded him a compensation of Rs.80,000/- with 9% interest. Aggrieved by that decision, the claimant has come up in appeal for enhancement of compensation. 2. The main grievance of the claimant is that on account of the accident he had sustained very severe injuries and that during the pendency of that application he had filed an application for amendment by enhancing the claim to Rs.4,00,0000/-. 3. Heard the counsel appearing for both sides. Learned counsel would submit that as the records are not available here one is not sure as to whether such an application has been filed and whether it has been allowed or not. Even if it is allowed, it has not been considered in the award because in the 2nd paragraph of the MACA No. 1722/07 2 award the reference is made only to an amount of Rs.1,00,000/-. Therefore, the matter requires reconsideration. The award under challenge is set aside and the matter is remitted back to the Tribunal for fresh consideration. If the amendment application is already allowed, parties are permitted to adduce documentary as well as oral evidence in support of their respective contentions. If the amendment application is not allowed, let it be considered and appropriate orders shall be passed by the Tribunal and then permit the parties to substantiate their contentions. I make it clear that this will not prevent the party from getting the amount, which is already awarded. Parties are directed to appear before the Tribunal on 11.12.08. M.N.KRISHNAN, JUDGE vps MACA No. 1722/07 3