IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE M.N.KRISHNAN TUESDAY, THE 29TH JULY 2008 / 7TH SRAVANA 1930 M.A.C.A.No. 1561 of 2006(B) ----------------------- OP(MV) NO.683/1999 OF MOTOR ACCIDENTS CLAIMS TRIBUNAL, KALPETTA,WAYANAD. .................... APPELLANT/3RD RESPONDENT : --------------------------- THE NATIONAL INSURANCE COMPANY LTD., BRANCH OFFICE, KORAMBAYIL ARCADE, PANDIKKAD ROAD, MANJERI 676 121. BY ADV. SRI.RAJAN P.KALIYATH RESPONDENTS/ CLAIMANT R1& R2: ---------------------------- 1. RAJAN, W/O.VELAPPAN, NECHIL HOUSE, PADDAYVLAYAL PLANTATIONS, VADUVANCHAL POST, MOOPPAINAD AMSOM, BATHERY TALUK. 2. PRAKASHAN, S/O.VELAPPAN, DRIVER HML ESTATE, ARAPETTA ESTATE, MEPPADY POST. 3. ANNAYYAN, S/O.KORUKAPPAN, MINI NIVAS, CHOORALMALA, VALLARMALA POST. BY ADV. SRI.GRASHIOUS KURIAKOSE - R2 THIS MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS APPEAL HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 29/07/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: M.A.C.A.No. 1561/2006 ORDER ON I.A NO.1796 OF 2006 IN M.A.C.A NO.1561 OF 2006 DISMISSED SD/- 29/07/2008 M.N. KRISHNAN, JUDGE /TRUE COPY/ P.A. TO JUDGE scm M.N.KRISHNAN, J. -------------------------- M.A.C.A. No. 1561 OF 2006 --------------------- Dated this the 29th day of July, 2008 JUDGMENT This appeal is preferred against the award passed by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Wayanad, in OP(MV) 683/99. The claimant aged 45 years sustained injuries in a road accident and the Tribunal had awarded him a compensation of Rs.74,800/-. It is against that decision the Insurance Company has come up in appeal. 2. It is also seen that their right to contest the case under section 170 has been allowed and they were permitted to cross- examine. A perusal of the documents available would show that the claimant had only sustained an injury on the heel flap and he was initially treated as inpatient only for three days. Subsequently, a disability certificate is produced showing that skin grafting has been done and there is partial loss of sensation and assessed the disability at 6%. He had been examined before the Tribunal. I feel even the percentage of disability is high for an injury of this nature. Similarly, except his oral assertions, there is nothing to show that he has lost his job. Therefore, it is desirable that a reasonable compensation is to be recalculated and given to him. MACA No.1561/06 2 3. I feel, considering the nature of the treatment, 4% disability will be sufficient. Fixing his income at Rs.2,500/- per mensum, the annual loss of earning power would come to Rs.1,200/- which when multiplied by 15 would come to Rs. 18,000/-. Therefore, a sum of Rs.25,200 (Rs.43,200-18,000) has to be deducted. After awarding such a liberal compensation again an amount of Rs.1,000/- need not be given for loss of earning power. For the injury sustained, huge amount is given for pain and suffering i.e. Rs.15,000/- which also requires deduction of Rs.3,000/-. So there will be a deduction of Rs.29,200/- from the total compensation awarded. Therefore, the appeal is partly allowed and the revised award is passed whereby the claimant is entitled to a compensation of Rs.45,600/- with 6% interest on the said sum from the date of petition till the amount is deposited. Needless to say that any amount deposited shall be given credit to and the balance amount need alone be deposited or paid. M.N.KRISHNAN, JUDGE vps MACA No.1561/06 3