IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE M.N.KRISHNAN THURSDAY, THE 22ND JULY 2010 / 31ST ASHADHA 1932 MACA.No. 206 of 2010() ----------------------------------- OPMV.798/2006 of MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS TRIBUNAL, IRINJALAKUDA .................... APPELLANT/PETITIONER ------------------------------------- MINTO @ MINTON, S/O.DEVASSIKUTTY, PAYYAPPILLY HOUSE, KUTTIKKADU DESOM, PARIYARAM VILLAGE, THRISSUR DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.V.BINOY RAM RESPONDENTS/RESPONDENTS ----------------------------------------------- 1. JOJU. C.C, S/O.CHAKKU,CHAKKIETH MOODA HOUSE, KARUKUTTY P.O, KARUKUTTY VILLAGE, ALUVA TALUK. 2. POULOSE. P.P, PYNADATH VATTAPARAMBIL HOUSE, KARUKUTTY P.O, ANGAMALY, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT. 3. THE NATIONAL INSURANCE CO.LTD., IIND FLOOR, DAMODAR CHAMBERS, STATUE JUNCTION, TRIPUNITHURA, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT. R3 BY ADV. SRI.M.A.GEORGE. THIS MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS APPEAL HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 22/07/2010,THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: rs. M.N. KRISHNAN, J. ........................................... M.A.C.A.NO.206 OF 2010 ............................................. Dated this the 22nd day of July, 2010. J U D G M E N T This is an appeal preferred against the award of the Claims Tribunal, Irinjalakkuda in OP(MV)No.798/2006. The claimant, a minor boy aged 14 years, sustained injuries in a road accident and he has been awarded a compensation of Rs.26,100/=. It is against that decision, the claimant has come up in appeal for enhancement. 2. Heard the learned counsel for the appellant as well as the insurance company. A perusal of the award would reveal that the claimant had sustained a lacerated wound over the forehead and an exposed injury on the leg. On radiological examination it was found that he had a fracture of the posterior tibial spine of the left leg. He was admitted in a hospital for 11 days. He had expended a sum of Rs.8,450/= towards medical expenses. Though he had produced a disability certificate of 8%, it was not accepted by the Tribunal for non examination of the doctor. 3. The learned counsel for the appellant has made available before me the disability certificate for perusal. : 2 : M.A.C.A.NO.206 OF 2010 The doctor had opined that there is a scar on the fracture side and there is wasting of quadriceps muscles and restriction of movement of the left knee. 4. It is true that the claimant or at least the doctor should have been examined to satisfy the conscience of the court regarding the disability. Therefore I cannot find fault with the Tribunal in not accepting the disability as such. But I feel that this is a case where the boy had a prolonged treatment coupled with fracture and exposure of the tendon. So, it is always desirable to grant more compensation towards loss of amenities and enjoyment for the boy. Therefore considering those circumstances, I award Rs.6,000/= towards loss of amenities and enjoyment in life. The accident is of the year 2006 and the treatment is a prolonged one. The agony faced by the boy was suffering. Therefore I enhance the compensation for pain and suffering by Rs.3,000/= thus making an additional compensation of Rs.9,000/=. 5. In the result, the appeal is allowed and the claimant is awarded an additional compensation of Rs.9,000/= : 3 : M.A.C.A.NO.206 OF 2010 with 7% interest from the date of petition till realisation and the respondent insurance company is directed to deposit the said amount within a period of 60 days from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment. Disposed of accordingly M.N. KRISHNAN, JUDGE. cl : 4 : M.A.C.A.NO.206 OF 2010