IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.M.JOSEPH & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE M.L.JOSEPH FRANCIS TUESDAY, THE 26TH MAY 2009 / 5TH JYAISHTA 1931 MACA.No. 665 of 2004(C) ----------------------------------- (O.P.(MV).NO.1589/1997 OF MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS TRIBUNAL, THALASSERY) APPELLANT/PETITIONER: ------------------------------------- P.V.SUDHAKARAN, S/O. KANNAN P.V., AGED 34 YEARS, PUTHIYANAM VEETTIL, KADANNAPPALLI, THEKKEKARA, P.O. KADANNAPPALLI, KANNUR DISTRICT. BY ADV. MR.M.V.AMARESAN. RESPONDENTS/ RESPONDENTS: ------------------------------------------------ 1. P.V.PAVITHRAN, S/O. RAMAN, AGED 29 YEARS, POYILE VEETTIL HOUSE, KADANNAPPALLI, KANNUR DIST. (DRIVER OF KL-13/A 1513 LMV AUTORIKSHAW). 2. NEW INDIA ASSURANCE CO. LTD., SOUTH BAZAR, PAYYANNUR, KANNUR DIST. POLICY NO.3176080554685, CERTIFICATE NO.028421. R2 BY ADV. SMT.A.C.DEVY. THIS MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS APPEAL HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 26/05/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: prv. K. M. JOSEPH & M. L. JOSEPH FRANCIS, JJ. -------------------------------------------------- M.A.C.A. NO. 665 OF 2004 C --------------------------------------------------- Dated this the 26th May, 2009 JUDGMENT K.M. JOSEPH, J. Appellant is the claimant. He was injured in an accident which took place on 16.4.1997. He was awarded a sum of Rs.93,580/=. Aggrieved by the said Award, he filed this Appeal. 2. We heard the learned counsel for the appellant and the learned counsel appearing for the respondents. Counsel for the appellant points out that the income taken is inadequate and the income should have been fixed at Rs.3,000/=. He further submits that the appellant had undergone four surgeries and he had to undergo travel and transportation charges were claimed at Rs.5,000/=, but what is granted is only Rs.1,500/=. He had also claimed extra nourishment, for which he was granted only Rs.2,000/=. He also points out that going by the disability certificate, the per centage of the disability which was fixed at seven is inadequate. MACA 665/04C 2 3. Having heard the matter, we would think that the appellant is entitled to enhanced compensation. We notice that the accident took place in the year 1997. The appellant has given evidence of his being receipt of income to the tune of Rs.3,000/=. According to him, he was working as a Conductor. No doubt, the Tribunal noticed that he has not produced any licence to show that he was working as Conductor. But, having regard to the totality of facts and with the evidence, we would think that the income can be fixed at Rs.2,000/= per month. The tribunal has awarded Rs.6,000/= as loss of earnings for four months. In view of the enhancement of income by Rs.500/= per month which we are ordering, the appellant will be entitled to Rs.2,000/= towards such enhancement. On the basis of the same, the appellant would be entitled to Rs.7,560/= towards enhanced compensation for disability. 4. We also find that the appellant should be given something more towards extra nourishment, in view of the MACA 665/04C 3 number of times he was hospitalised and the surgeries he had to undergo. We feel that the appellant should be awarded a further sum of Rs.3,000/= more. In such circumstances, the appellant would become entitled to a total sum of Rs.12,580/=, which is rounded off to Rs.13,000/=. Accordingly, the Appeal is allowed in part. The appellant is entitled to enhanced compensation of Rs.13,000/=. There will be an Award for Rs.13,000/= against the respondents which will carry interest at 7.5 per cent from the date of the petition till the date of payment. Sd/= K.M. JOSEPH, JUDGE Sd/= M. L. JOSEPH FRANCIS, JUDGE kbk. // True Copy // PS to Judge MACA 665/04C 4 K.M. JOSEPH & M.L. JOSEPH FRANCIS, JJ. M.A.C.A.NO.665 OF 2004 C JUDGMENT 26th MAY, 2009.