IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE C.N.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE HARUN-UL-RASHID MONDAY, THE 13TH OCTOBER 2008 / 21ST ASWINA 1930 MACA.No. 39 of 2006() --------------------- OPMV.757/2002 of MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS TRIBUNAL, THODUPUZHA .................... APPELLANT(S): APPELLANT/PETITIONER ---------------------------------- SUSY, W/O.JOHNY, NO-B-11, MAIN ROAD, INDIRA NAGAR, ADAYAR, CHENNAI, NOW RESIDING AT ELLICKAL HOUSE, KANJAR KARA, ARAKULAM VILLAGE. BY ADV. SRI.MATHEW JOHN (K) SRI.SUJESH MENON V.B. RESPONDENT(S): --------------- 1. JIMMY @ T.P.GEORGE, S/O.GEORGE PULIKUNNEL HOUSE, THIDANADU P.O., KONDOOR VILLAGE, KOTTAYAM DT. 2. P.V.BAIJU, S/O.A.P.VISWAMBHARAN, PADINJAREPARAMBIL HOUSE, PERUMANA WEST, PANACHIKAVU P.O., CHANGANASSERY. 3. NEW INDIA ASSURANCE CO. LTD., KOTTAYAM. ADV. SRI.P.C.HARIDAS FOR R1 SRI.JOY GEORGE FOR R3 SRI.T.H.ABDUL AZEEZ FOR R2 SRI.P.H.MOHAMMED BASHEER RAWTHER FOR R2 THIS MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS APPEAL HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 13/10/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: C.N.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR & HARUN-UL-RASHID, JJ. .................................................................... M.A.C.A. No.39 of 2006 .................................................................... Dated this the 13th day of October, 2008. JUDGMENT Ramachandran Nair, J. The appeal is filed for enhancement of compensation for the injury sustained by the appellant in a road accident. We have heard counsel appearing for the appellant and Standing Counsel appearing for the Insurance Company. 2. The main dispute is against the fixation of income for the purpose of grant of compensation for loss of earning power. The appellant sustained fracture of bones which led to protracted treatment as inpatient for nearly two months and as outpatient for a long period. Even though disability was certified at 25%, MACT accepted percentage of disability only at 20%. Considering the nature of injuries and the possible exaggeration in the percentage of disability, we do not want to interfere with the limitation of disability at 20% by the MACT. However, we feel income of the appellant deserves to be enhanced for granting compensation. Counsel for the Insurance Company pointed out that the registration certificate produced by the appellant does not by itself establish the business 2 she was said to be carrying on. However, counsel for the appellant contended that even if the claim is rejected, appellant even as a house wife is entitled to have the notional income fixed atleast at Rs.3,000/- per month. We find force in this contention because the appellant was only 43 years of age at the time of the accident and her services even as a house wife has to be valued reasonably. We, therefore, fix the notional income of the appellant at Rs.3,000/- per month which will lead to enhancement of compensation for loss of earning power from Rs.54,000/- to Rs.1,08,000/-. Besides this, we feel appellant is entitled to actual loss of earning for another two months at the rate of Rs.3,000/- per month. Consequently appellant will be entitled to additional compensation of Rs.6,000/- for the two months and a further sum of Rs.3,000/- being the difference between the amount granted for two months and what is due to the appellant on account of increase in income. The Insurance Company is directed to deposit the additional compensation amount with interest at 7.5% p.a. from date of application till date of payment. The appeal stands allowed to the above extent. C.N.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR Judge HARUN-UL-RASHID Judge pms