IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE A.K.BASHEER & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.Q.BARKATH ALI WEDNESDAY, THE 24TH FEBRUARY 2010 / 5TH PHALGUNA 1931 MACA.No. 1235 of 2007() ----------------------- OPMV.2121/2000 of PRL.MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS TRIBUNAL, KOZHIKODE .................... APPELLANT/PETITIONER IN THE OP(MV) ------------------------------------------------- DEEPAK (MINOR), AGED 1 YEAR, REPRESENTED BY HIS FATHER & LEGAL GUARDIAN, P.PRADEEP, S/O. KUNHIKOLAVAN, AGED 32 YEARS, RESIDING AT MURIKKOLI PURAYIL VEEDU, P.O.CHELEMBRA, MALAPPURAM. BY ADV. SMT.LATHA PRABHAKARAN SRI.K.M.JAMALUDHEEN RESPONDENTS/ RESPONDENTS IN THE OP(MV) ----------------------------------------- 1. MANAGING PARTNER, KERALA TRANSPORT COMPANY, YMCA ROAD, KOZHIKODE. 2. NEW INDIA ASSURANCE COMPANY LIMITED, THRIPURI BUILDING, EAST NADAKKAVU, KOZHIKODE. 3. M.P.SHEREER, S/O. AHAMMEDKUTTY, AGE NOT KNOWN, RESIDING AT MANGATTUPULATHIL HOUSE, P.O.EDAVANNA, MALAPPURAM. 4. UNITED INDIA INSURANCE COMPANY LIMITED, MALAPPURAM. ADV. SRI.P.M.M.NAJEEB KHAN FOR R2 SRI.N.S.MOHAMMED USMAN FOR R4 THIS MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS APPEAL HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 24/02/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: A.K.BASHEER & P.Q. BARKATH ALI, JJ. ------------------------- M.A.C.A No.1235 of 2007 -------------------------- Dated this the 24th February, 2010 J U D G M E N T Barkath Ali,J. In this appeal under Section 173 of the Motor Vehicles Act filed by the claimant in O.P. (MV) No.2121 of 2000 of the Principal Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Kozhikode challenges the judgment and award of the Tribunal dated October 16, 2006 awarding a compensation of Rs.14,665/- to the claimant for the loss caused to him on account of the injury sustained in a motor accident. 2. The facts in brief are these: The appellant/claimant is a boy aged one year represented by his father and guardian. On June 2004, he was travelling in the bus bearing Reg.KL-22/9245 from Ramanattukara to Ramapuram. It collided head on a jeep bearing Reg.No. KRC-2012. The claimant sustained serious injuries. According to the claimant the accident occurred due to negligence on the part of both the drivers of both the vehicles. First respondent as the owner and 2nd M.A.C.A No.1235 of 2007 2 respondent as the insurer of the bus, 3rd respondent as the owner and 4th respondent as the insurer of the jeep are jointly and severally liable to pay compensation to the claimant. 3. Respondents 2 and 4 filed a written statement admitting the policy. Other respondents remained absent before the Tribunal. 4. On the side of the claimant Exts. A1 to A4 and Ext.C1 were marked. On the side of the contesting respondents Ext.B1 was marked. On an appreciation of evidence, the Tribunal found that the accident occurred due to negligence on the part of both the drivers and awarded a compensation of Rs.14,665/-. The claimant has now come up in appeal challenging the quantum of compensation awarded by the Tribunal. 5. The accident is not disputed. The finding of the Tribunal that the accident occurred due to negligence on the part of drivers of both the vehicles is not challenged in this appeal. Therefore, the only question which arise for consideration is whether the claimant is entitled to any M.A.C.A No.1235 of 2007 3 enhanced compensation. The Tribunal awarded compensation as follows: Medical Bill - Rs. 415 Transportation charges - 500 Medical treatment - 2,000 Pain and Suffering - 9,000 Loss of amenity - 2,000 2 days hospitalisation and incidental charges - 750 -------------------- 14,665 ======== 6. The claimant boy sustained fracture of right humerus. Ext.A2 is the discharge summary. Ext.A3 is the O.P. ticket and Ext.A4 series are medical bills for Rs.415/-. Ext.C1 disability certificate shows that the claimant has suffered a permanent disability of 2%. 7. The counsel for the appellant argued that no compensation was awarded by the Tribunal for the disability caused to the claimant and that as Ext.C1 certificate of disability shows that the claimant has suffered a permanent disability of 2%, the Tribunal should M.A.C.A No.1235 of 2007 4 have awarded some amount for the disability caused to the claimant. We find no merit in the above contention. The claimant being a boy aged one year and as it is certified by the Doctor that the fracture has healed well, there could not have been any disability caused to the claimant due to the injury sustained. Therefore, the Tribunal is justified in not awarding any compensation for the alleged disability caused. The compensation awarded under the heads appear to be reasonable and is not questioned before us. But there is another aspect that the Tribunal awarded interest only at the rate of 6% per annum which is very low. The claimant will be entitled to interest at the rate of 7.5% per annum from the date of petition till realisation on the entire amount of compensation awarded by the Tribunal. The appeal is disposed of, as above. A.K.BASHEER,JUDGE P.Q. BARKATH ALI, JUDGE ma M.A.C.A No.1235 of 2007 5 M.A.C.A No.1235 of 2007 6