IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE M.N.KRISHNAN WEDNESDAY, THE 11TH JUNE 2008 / 21ST JYAISHTA 1930 MACA.No. 702 of 2005() ---------------------- OPMV.1129/1999 of MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS TRIBUNAL, PUNALUR .................... APPELLANT/CLAIMANT : ------------------------------------- NOUSHAD. A., THENGUVILAYIL VEEDU, KOTTAVATTOM, ELAMPAL, PUNALUR. BY ADV. SRI.T.KURIAKOSE PETER SRI.ABRAHAM P.GEORGE RESPONDENTS: ------------- 1. R. RADHAKRISHNAN, PANCHAYIL VEEDU, PACHA P.O., PALODU. 2. HARIKUMAR. J., HARI SADANAM, ARYAMCAVU, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 3. THE DISTRICT INSURANCE OFFICER, KERALA STATE INSURANCE DEPARTMENT THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. BY SR. GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI.V.T.K.MOHANAN, FOR R3 THIS MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS APPEAL HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 11/06/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: M.N.KRISHNAN, J. ---------------------------------------------- M.A.C.A No.702 of 2005 ---------------------------------------------- Dated 11th June, 2008. J U D G M E N T This appeal is preferred against the award of the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Punalur in O.P.(MV) No.1129/99, whereby the Tribunal has awarded a total compensation of Rs.12,949/-. Dissatisfied with the compensation, the claimant has come up in appeal. 2. Heard learned counsel for the appellant as well as the counsel appearing for the third respondent Insurance Department. A perusal of the records would reveal that this young man aged 21 years had sustained a fracture on the ulna and plastering was done, and surgery was also effected. A perusal of Ext.A9(a) and the prescriptions would show that he had undergone prolonged treatment and it can be seen that there was some callus formation and even on 3.6.2000, he had pain on the forearm. He had been visiting the hospital quite often and the things would certainly reveal that he had taken prolonged treatment for proper cure. Being a person who was doing only manual labour, he would not have been in a position to do any MACA NO.702/05 2 work for a period of six months. Accepting the income fixed by the Tribunal, an additional compensation has to be given for four more months' loss of earning, which would come to Rs.6,000/-. The treatment records reveal the prolonged treatment and the pain the claimant had undergone. I enhance the compensation for pain and suffering by Rs.4,000/-. On all other heads, the compensation awarded by the Tribunal is proper and that does not call for any interference. In the result, the appeal is partly allowed and the claimant is awarded an additional compensation of Rs.10,000/- with 7% interest on the said sum from the date of the petition till realization and the Insurance Company is directed to deposit the said amount within 60 days from the date of receipt of a copy of the judgment. M.N.KRISHNAN, JUDGE. tgs M.N.KRISHNAN, J. ---------------------------------------------- M.A.C.A. No.702 of 2005 ---------------------------------------------- J U D G M E N T Dated 11th June, 2008.