IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE M.N.KRISHNAN TUESDAY, THE 22ND JULY 2008 / 31ST ASHADHA 1930 MACA.No. 1990 of 2005() ---------------------------------- OPMV.460/2001 of MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS TRIBUNAL, MANJERI .................... APPELLANT/CLAIMANT. ----------------------------------- HAMZA @ K.HAMZA, C/O.CHEUIRAYIN, KODALI HOUSE, PILAKOTTUMPADAM PULLIYIL, KARULAI POST, MALAPPURAM. BY ADV. SRI.VINOD VALLIKAPPAN RESPONDENTS/ RESPONDENTS. ---------------------------------------------- 1. SADIKALI, S/O.MOHAMMED, UZHUNNAN HOUSE, VELLARAMKUNNU, EDAKKARA, MALAPPURAM. 2. U.ALI, S/O.UNNIPOKER, ULLATTIL HOUSE, EDAKKARA POST, MALAPPURAM. (* DELETED) 3. M/S.UNITED INDIA INSURANCE COMPANY LTD., BRANCH OFFICE, NILAMBUR, MALAPPURAM. * R2 IS DELETED AS PER ORDER DATED 22/07/2008 IN MACA BY ADV. SRI.MATHEWS JACOB (SR.) - R3 SRI.P.JACOB MATHEW - R3 THIS MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS APPEAL HAVING COME UP FOR ADM ISSION ON 22/07/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: M.N. KRISHNAN, J. = = = = = = = = = = = = = = M.A.C.A. NO. 1990 OF 2005 = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = Dated this the 22nd day of July, 2008. J U D G M E N T This appeal is preferred against the award of the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Manjeri in O.P.(MV)460/01. The claimant had sustained a lacerated wound on the eyelid coupled with nasal bone fracture. The Tribunal awarded a total compensation of Rs.20,537/-. It is against that decision, the claimant has come up in appeal. 2. Learned counsel for the appellant very strongly contends before me that the Tribunal did not take into consideration Ext.A6 certificate. According to that certificate there is a nasal deviation which requires surgery by an approximate cost of Rs.15,000/-. It is not correct to say that the Tribunal has not taken into consideration that fact at all. It has awarded an additional expenses of Rs.9,000/-. Without a proper document, the amount in the certificate cannot be allowed. So I do not want to interfere with that finding. But at the same time it is seen that the Tribunal has M.A.C.A. 1990 OF 2005 -:2:- not given any amount towards actual loss of earnings. For a person who was working, on account of the nasal bone fracture he would have been prevented from doing any work for 6 to 8 weeks. I award him Rs.3,000/- towards actual loss of earnings. Certainly, the injuries sustained would have caused him loss of amenities and enjoyment in life for which I award him Rs.5,000/-. Therefore the claimant will be entitled to an additional compensation of Rs.8,000/-. In the result the MACA is partly allowed and the claimant is awarded an additional compensation of Rs.8,000/- with 6% interest on the said sum from the date of petition till realisation and the insurance company is directed to deposit the same within a period of sixty days from the date of receipt of a copy of the judgment. M.N. KRISHNAN, JUDGE. ul/-