IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE C.N.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE HARUN-UL-RASHID TUESDAY, THE 4TH NOVEMBER 2008 / 13TH KARTHIKA 1930 MACA.No. 1274 of 2005() ----------------------- OPMV.314/1997 of MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS TRIBUNAL, ALAPPUZHA .................... APPELLANT(S): APPELLANT. ------------------------ K.A.JOSEPH, KURISINKAL VEEDU, SANATHANAM WARD, ARYAD SOUTH VILLAGE, ALAPPUZHA. BY ADV. SRI.PHILIP T.VARGHESE SRI.THOMAS T.VARGHESE RESPONDENT(S): --------------- 1. RAJEEV, S.O.GOPALAN, CHATTISSERY VEEDU, MUHAMMA PANCHAYATH, 9TH WARD, ALAPPUZHA. 2. RAVEENDRAN, S/O.DAMODHARAN, THOTTUNGAL HOUSE, MUHAMMA P.O. 3. THE MANAGER, THE ORIENTAL INSURANCE COMPANY LIMITED, DIVISIONAL OFFICE, THYAGARAJ ROAD, MADRAS 600 017. THIS MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS APPEAL HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 04/11/2008, THE COURT ON 04/11/2008 DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: C.N.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR & HARUN-UL-RASHID, JJ. .................................................................... M.A.C.A. No.1274 of 2005 .................................................................... Dated this the 4th day of October, 2008. JUDGMENT Ramachandran Nair, J. Appeal is filed for enhancement of compensation for the injury sustained by the appellant in a road accident. Even though notice was served on the respondents, there is no appearance. Therefore, we have heard counsel for the appellant, gone through the award and proceed to dispose of the case on merits. 2. Counsel for the appellant relied on the documents produced such as sales tax returns, income statement etc. and contended that compensation for loss of earning determined is very low. Appellant is a coir exporter who claims to be earning Rs.1,15,000/- per month at the time of accident. However, it is seen that the turnover declared is only Rs.52 lakhs for an year. Going by the turnover conceded, it is difficult to believe that the appellant would have been earning so much income per month. However, there is no need to consider the genuineness or otherwise of the documents produced because there is nothing to 2 indicate that the accident, which though led to hospitalisation of the appellant for 7 days and disability for some period, has affected his export business leading to loss of export profits and income from business. Even though appellant suffered injuries including fracture of ribs, he was in the hospital only for 7 days and probably on account of the injury, appellant would have had to rest for three months. However, there is nothing to indicate that he had lost export orders leading to reduction of business or income. Therefore, MACT rightly estimated notional income and worked out compensation for loss of earning at 18%, based on the medical certificate produced by the appellant. However, we feel the notional income adopted is little on the low side. Therefore, we increase the same by 25% which will entitle the appellant for an additional compensation for Rs.60,000/-. The Insurance Company is directed to deposit this amount with interest at 7.5% p.a. from date of application till date of payment. We make it clear that even though appellant's wife gave a statement to the Police that accident was partly due to the oversight of the appellant, we do not find any justification to interfere with the finding of the MACT that 3 accident is caused solely on account of negligence of the offending vehicle i.e. tempo van which hit appellant's car and the Insurance Company also has not filed any appeal alleging contributory negligence on the appellant. Appeal stands allowed to the above extent. C.N.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR Judge HARUN-UL-RASHID Judge pms