IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.PADMANABHAN NAIR TUESDAY, THE 16TH OCTOBER 2007 / 24TH ASWINA 1929 MACA.No. 788 of 2003() ---------------------- OPMV.149/1995 of MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS TRIBUNAL, IRINJALAKUDA .................... APPELLANT/PETITIONER: ------------- VARGHESE, AGED 35, S/O. THOMAS, KONNAMPILLY HOUSE, P.O. PERAMBRA, KODAKARA VILLAGE. BY ADV. SRI.T.N.MANOJ SRI.DINESH R.SHENOY RESPONDENTS: RESPONDENTS: ----------------- * 1. MR. JACOB BUS WEIGH BRIDGE COLLECTORATE, KOTTAYAM. (DELETED) * 2. J.S. CHELLIAH, S/O. JOHN SAMUVEL, DOOR NO.2/21, BAKKAVANDAL NAGAR, P.O. KAILASAM, PALAYAM, THIRUCHAMKODE TALUK, SALEM DISTRICT. (DELETED) (R1 & R2 ARE DELETED FROM THE PARTY ARRAY AT THE RISK OF THE APPELLANT , AS PER ORDER DATED 8.8.2007 IN I.A.NO.1691/2007) 3. THE MANAGER, UNITED INDIA INSURANCE CO., KOTTAYAM. BY ADV. SMT.P.A.REZIYA THIS MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS APPEAL HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 16/10/2007 , THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: K.PADMANABHAN NAIR, J. ------------------------------- M.A.C.A.No. 788 of 2003 ------------------------------- Dated this the 16th October, 2007. J U D G M E N T Petitioner in O.P.(M.V.) No.149/1995, on the file of the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Irinjalakuda, is the appellant. The appeal is filed by the claimant against the quantum of compensation awarded to him. On 11.3.1994, appellant sustained injuries in a motor vehicle accident. He filed the Original Petition claiming compensation. It was alleged that he was riding a bi-cycle, and a lorry bearing Registration No.KL 5B 5020, driven by the second respondent, in a rash or negligent manner came and hit against the bi-cycle. He sustained injuries. Appellant claimed compensation impleading the owner, driver and insurer of the lorry. 3rd respondent alone contested the matter. Owner and driver did not appear and contest the matter. The Insurer had admitted existence of a policy, but denied the negligence alleged against the driver of the lorry. Quantum of compensation claimed was also disputed. The Tribunal found that the accident occurred due to the negligence of the driver of the lorry. It M.A.C.A.No.788/2003 2 awarded a compensation of Rs.28,000/=, but did not allow the cost. Claimant has filed this appeal contending that the quantum of compensation awarded is too low. 2. The finding of the Tribunal that the accident occurred due to the negligence of the driver of the lorry and the appellant is entitled to get compensation have become final and conclusive. The finding of the Tribunal that the Insurer is liable to indemnify the injured has also become final. The only question arising for consideration in this appeal is whether the appellant is entitled to get any additional compensation. 3. According to the appellant, he is working under a Contractor and earning an income of Rs.2500/= per mensem. Ext.A4 wound certificate shows that the appellant sustained the following injuries:- “1. Swelling on right occipital region, left leg and left ankle. 2. Fracture middle 3rd of tibia. 3. Fracture malleolus.” M.A.C.A.No.788/2003 3 Appellant has also produced a salary certificate issued by his employer which is marked as Ext.A10. Ext.A9 is the disability certificate issued by the Dr. Ephraim Ambookan, Irinjalakuda. It shows disability as 10%. I am of the view that the Tribunal was not justified in taking Rs.1000/= as his income, after admitting Ext.A10 evidence without objection. Even assuming that the appellant may not be having 10% disability, it is not possible to hold that it is a case without any disability at all. The court below ought to have taken at least 5% as the disability. I am of the view that the court below ought to have given 17,500/= more on all these counts together. The court below has disallowed the cost. I do not find any reason to disallow the same. So, the appellant is entitled to get the cost awarded by the court below. The additional compensation will carry interest at the rate of 6% from the date of petition till the date of realisation. In the result, the appeal is allowed in part. An award is passed allowing the appellant to recover an amount of Rs.17,500/= as additional compensation from the respondents with 6% interest from the date of petition, till the date of realisation. The M.A.C.A.No.788/2003 4 3rd respondent, Insurer, is directed to deposit the above amount in favour of the appellant. On deposit, the appellant can withdraw the amount. K.PADMANABHAN NAIR, JUDGE nj.