IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE M.N.KRISHNAN FRIDAY, THE 19TH FEBRUARY 2010 / 30TH MAGHA 1931 MACA.No. 2674 of 2009() -------------------------------- OPMV.1319/2002 of MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS TRIBUNAL, MANJERI .................... APPELLANT(S): PETITIONER ------------------------ SAROJINI, W/O.PADMANABHAN, AGED 48 YEARS, POOVATHIPOYIL HOUSE, AMARAMBALAM SOUTH P.O. BY ADV. MR.SUNNY MATHEW RESPONDENT(S): RESPONDENT ------------------------- 1. SUDHAKRISHNAN, S/O.SAROJINI, KADAMBATH HOUSE, PAYYAMPALLY, R.S.(PO), NILAMBUR. 2. SAFARULLA, S/O.ABDURAHIMAN, MANNUTHODIKA HOUSE, CHAKALAKUTH, P.O.NILAMBUR. 3. THE ORIENTAL INSURANCE CO.LTD., JASEELA COMPLEX, NILAMBUR ROAD, MANJERI. R1 BY ADVS.MR.A.V.JAMES MR.P.DALBI EMMANUEL R3 BY MR.GEORGE CHERIAN (THIRUVALLA) THIS MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS APPEAL HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 19/02/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: tss M.N. KRISHNAN, J. ........................................... M.A.C.A. No.2674 OF 2009 ............................................. Dated this the 19th day of February, 2010. J U D G M E N T This appeal is preferred against the award of the Claims Tribunal, Manjeri in OP(MV)No.1319/2002. The claimant, a 48 year old full time sweeper in Nilambur panchayat office, sustained injuries in a road accident, on account of which, he had a contusion on her right shoulder and a compressed fracture of L4 vertebra. She was treated as an inpatient for 20 days and her disability was fixed at 10%. The tribunal awarded a compensation of Rs.27,800/= and directed the insurance company to pay the amount. It is against that decision, the claimant has come up in appeal for enhancement. 2. Heard the learned counsel for all. Admittedly the claimant is a full time sweeper in Nilambur panchayat. Her retirement age would be 55. Therefore there will not be any loss of earnings till the age of 55. Beyond the age of 55 as per the decision in Sarla Verma v. Delhi Transport Corporation (2009 ACJ 1298) the multiplier to be used is 9. : 2 : M.A.C.A. No.2674 OF 2009 If the income is taken at Rs.2,000/= and the disability of 10% and a multiplier of 9 is used, the disability compensation would come to Rs.21,600/= out of which Rs.16,500/= has been granted. Therefore the claimant will be entitled to an additional compensation of Rs.5,100/= under the head of disability. She was admitted as an inpatient in a hospital for 20 days and the nature of the fracture is on the vertebra. She would be a house wife as well. Therefore the pain which she had undergone not only during the period of hospitalisation but thereafter also must have to be considered and therefore I enhance that compensation by Rs.5,000/=. No disability compensation is awarded to her in between the age of 48-55 and certainly as the age progresses, loss of amenities would be more and inconveniences would be large. Therefore taking into consideration all those aspects, I am inclined to award Rs.5,000/= towards loss of amenities as well. Therefore the claimant will be entitled to an additional compensation of Rs.15,100/=. 3. In the result, the MACA is partly allowed and the : 3 : M.A.C.A. No.2674 OF 2009 claimant is awarded an additional compensation of Rs.15,100/= from the date of petition till 14.11.2007 and thereafter from 14.9.2009 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.2674 OF 2009