IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE M.N.KRISHNAN FRIDAY, THE 25TH JULY 2008 / 3RD SRAVANA 1930 M.A.C.A.No. 512 of 2007(F) ---------------------- OP(MV).1772/2001 of MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS TRIBUNAL, ATTINGAL .................... APPELLANT/APPLICANT: ------------------------------------ SHOBI, W/O.RAJAN, PALLIVILA VEEDU, ARASU PARAMBU, NEDUMANGAD P.O., THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. BY ADV. SRI.G.APPAN RESPONDENTS/RESPONDENTS: -------------------------------------------- 1. ABDUL SALAM, H.NO.4/547, SARALA COLONY, IRUMBA ARUVIKKARA, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 2. S.MAHEENKUNJU, S/O.SALLUDEEN MUTTENVILA VEEDU, CHRIST NAGAR VAZHAYILA, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 3. UNITED INDIA INSURANCE CO.LTD C.W.C.BUILDING, L.M.S.COMPOUND, MUSEUM, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. REPRESENTED BY ITS DIVISIONAL MANAGER. BY ADV. SRI.A.R.GEORGE FOR R.3 THIS MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS APPEAL HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 25/07/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: M.N. KRISHNAN, J ------------------------- M.A.C.A.No. 512 OF 2007 ------------------------------------ Dated this the 25th day of July, 2008 J U D G M E N T This appeal is preferred against the award passed by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Attingal in O.P(MV) No. 1772/01. The claimant a lady aged 31 years sustained injuries in a road accident. She had suffered a fracture on the Lateral Tibial Condyle of left knee and was treated with long leg slab. The plaster was removed on 12.10.2001. The Tribunal fixed her income at Rs. 1,200/-. Though disability certificate of 18% was produced, the Tribunal calculated it as 13% and awarded the compensation. It is aggrieved by that decision the present appeal is preferred. 2. Heard. It can be seen from the document Ext. A10 that she was born on 3.5.1970 and the accident has taken on 13.8.2001, which would indicate that she had completed 31 years on the date of the accident. When 31 is the age, the appropriate multiplier as per the table is only 17. But the Tribunal has taken it as 18. So it requires correction. When it is corrected, there will be difference of Rs.1872/-. 3. The Tribunal did not grant proper compensation on many heads. It is seen from the award itself that her leg was under plaster cast for a period of two months. So it is clear that she was not able M.A.C.A. No. 512/07 -2- to do any work for a period of three months. Therefore she is entitled for loss of earning for a period of three months and after deducting Rs. 600/- it will come to 3,000/-. Similarly, the lady who had sustained serious fracture on the leg and who was under treatment for a period of two months had been granted only Rs. 2,000/- towards pain and suffering which is inadequate. I award Rs. 6,000/- more under that head. It is true that documents were not produced to prove the exact medical expenses and therefore it may not be correct to totally discard the treatment process and therefore I award a sum of Rs. 1,000/- under that head. So additional compensation would comes to Rs. 10,000/- and when Rs. 1,872/- is deducted the additional compensation would come to Rs. 8,128/- which is rounded as Rs. 8,150/-. Therefore the M.A.C.A is partly allowed and the claimant is awarded an additional compensation of Rs. 8,150/- with 7% interest on the said sum from the date of petition till realisation and the respondent Insurance Company is directed to deposit the amount within 60 days from the date of receipt of copy of the judgment. M.N. KRISHNAN, JUDGE vkm