IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE C.N.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR THURSDAY, THE 24TH JULY 2008 / 2ND SRAVANA 1930 OP.No. 27190 of 2000(J) ----------------------- PETITIONER: ------------ THE NATIONAL INSURANCE CO.LTD., KALPETTA, REPRESENTED BY ITS ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICER, REGIONAL OFFICE, M.G. ROAD, ERNAKULAM. BY ADV. SRI.GEORGE CHERIAN (THIRUVALLA) RESPONDENTS: ------------- 1. N.K. GANGADHARAN NAMBIAR, S/O. KRISHNAN NAIR, ANIL NIVAS, KOLIYADI, NENMENI POST, WAYANAD DIST. 2. MANOJ KUMAR, SON OF THANKAPPAN, POTTATHOTTIYIL VEEDU, NENMENIKUNNU, POST CHEERAL, WAYANAD. 3. P.K. RAJASHEKHARAN, SON OF KESAVAN CHETTY, PUTHUSERY HOUSE, NAMBIARKUNNU POST, WAYANAD. 4. THE HON'BLE MOTOR ACCIDENTS CLAIMS TRIBUNAL, KALPETTA. BY ADV. SRI.M.C.JOHN FOR R1 SRI.JESWIN P.VARGHESE FOR R1 THIS ORIGINAL PETITION HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 24/07/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: 2 ORDER ON CMP 45590 OF 2000 & I.A.NO.3095 OF 2004 BOTH IN OP 27190 OF 2000 DISMISSED 24.7.2008 SD/-C.N.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR, JUDGE. APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS: EXT.P1 TRUE COPY OF THE OP MV NO. 364 OF 1997 ON THE FILE OF THE MOTOR ACCIDENTS CLAIMS TRIBUNAL, KALPETTA. EXT.P2 TRUE COPY OF THE WOUND CERTIFICATE IN RESPECT OF FIRST RESPONDENT DATED 7.2.97 EXT.P3 TRUE COPY OF THE WRITTEN STATEMENT IN OP MV NO. 364 OF 1997 FILED BY THE PETITIONER. EXT.P4 TRUE COPY OF THE AWARD IN OP MV. 364 OF 1997 DATED 23.6.2000 RESPONDENTS' EXHIBITS: NIL. TRUE COPY P.S. TO JUDGE. C.N. RAMACHANDRAN NAIR, J. -------------------------------------------- O.P. NO. 27190 OF 2000 -------------------------------------------- Dated this the 24th day of July, 2008 JUDGMENT Heard counsel for the petitioner and counsel appearing for the first respondent. Petitioner, insurance company, is challenging Ext.P4 award on the ground that the same was passed indifferently without giving opportunity to the insurance company to adduce evidence and without even considering the evidence on records. On going through the award, I find the claimant never filed proof affidavit, nor was he examined as a witness. Besides this, the doctor, who issued the disaiblity certificate, was also not examined. In fact, award is passed based on the averments in the claim petition and disability certificate produced. The major dispute raised by the insurance company is that as against 3% disability certified by the doctor, the Tribunal assumed 10% disability and awarded Rs. 75,000/- towards compensation for disability. In the normal course on account of impropriety in passing the award without adequate evidence, the matter should be remanded to the Tribunal again. However, it is seen that the accident occured on 2 7.2.1997, that is, more than 11 years back and the award itself was passed in June, 2000. Besides this, the claimant was 63 years of age at the time of making application. Therefore remand will certainly delay the payment of compensation to the claimant. Hence for the sake of finality, and having regard to the mistake committed by the Tribunal in the per centage of disability reckoned, which is more than three times the percentage of disability certified by the doctor, I reduce the compensation awarded under the head of disability to Rs. 25,000/- as against Rs. 75,000/- awarded by the Tribunal. Even though counsel for the petitioner contended that medical bills are also exaggerated, I do not think there is any scope for interference. The insurance company will deposit the balance of the modified amount with interest at the rate of 7.5 per cent per annum as against 12% awarded by the Tribunal, from the date of application till date of payment. O.P. is disposed of as above. (C.N. RAMACHANDRAN NAIR) Judge kk 3