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 30TH SEPTEMBER 2008 / 8TH ASWINA 1930 MACA.No. 702 of 2004() ---------------------- OPMV.1760/1998 of MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS TRIBUNAL, THALASSERY .................... APPELLANT/PETITIONER: ----------------------------------- SUJITH, S/O. ACHUTHAN, SUJAMALAYAM, P.O. AYITHARA MAMBARAM, KUTHUPARAMBA, KANNUR DIST. BY ADV. SRI.E.V.NAYANAR RESPONDENTS: RESPONDENTS: --------------------------- 1. K.K.VINOD, S/O. RAMESHAN, KAIPPADATH HOUSE, P.O. AMBAYATHODE, VIA. KOTTIYOOR, KANNUR DIST. 2. K.K.DANANDRAN, S/O. KRISHNAN KUTTY, KARIPPADATH HOUSE, P.O. AMBAYATHODE, VIA. KOTTIYOOR, KANNUR DIST. 3. UNITED INDIA INSURANCE CO. LTD., P.B.NO.11, XVI/405, PANDI AUTOMOBILE BUILDING, MALAPPURAM-1. ADV. SRI.N.S.MOHAMMED USMAN FOR R3 THIS MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS APPEAL HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 30/09/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: C.N. RAMACHANDRAN NAIR & HARUN-UL-RASHID, JJ. --------------------------------------------------------- M.A.C.A.NO. 702 OF 2004 --------------------------------------------------------- Dated this the 30th day of September, 2008 JUDGMENT Ramachandran Nair, J. Appeal is filed for enhancement of compensation awarded by the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Thalassery in O.P.(MV) No.1760 of 1998 for the injury sustained by the appellant in a road accident. 2. We have heard counsel appearing for the appellant and Standing Counsel appearing for the Insurance Company. 3. Appellant at the time of the accident was only 19 years of age and was stated to be a skilled labourer engaged in marble laying. Counsel for the Insurance Company submitted that there is no proof regarding the work undertaken by the appellant. We do not think that there is any need M.A.C.A. NO. 702/2004 2 to go into this question because even as a daily wager the appellant would have been able to earn Rs.3,000/- per month. Even though counsel for the appellant claimed that disability is more than 50%, we do not want to disturb the percentage of disability fixed by the Tribunal because disability is on account of amputation of one leg above the ankle and that with an artificial leg the appellant can do the work, though not to the extent he would have been able to do with the original leg. The Medical Board certified permanent disability at 50% and the same was accepted by the Tribunal. The Tribunal has fixed the income of the appellant at Rs.18,000/- per year. Having regard to the increase in wages, we have increased the income of the appellant from Rs.18,000/- to Rs.36,000/- per year and on account of the said increase, appellant will be entitled to get Rs.2,88,000/- for permanent disability as against Rs.1,44,000/- granted by the Tribunal. Even though compensation is granted under other heads, being a 19 year old person who lost one of his legs, we feel that the appellant is entitled to further compensation towards loss of marriage proposals, pain and suffering and loss of enjoyment. We, therefore, grant a further compensation of Rs.50,000/- under these heads. The Insurance Company is directed to deposit the additional compensation with interest at the rate of 7 1/2 % per annum from the date of application till date of M.A.C.A. NO. 702/2004 3 payment. The appeal is allowed to the above extent. (C.N. RAMACHANDRAN NAIR) JUDGE (HARUN-UL-RASHID) JUDGE sp/ M.A.C.A. NO. 702/2004 4 C.N. RAMACHANDRAN NAIR & HAURN-UL-RASHID, JJ. M.A.C.A. NO. 702/2004 JUDGMENT 30th September, 2008 M.A.C.A. NO. 702/2004 5