IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE M.N.KRISHNAN WEDNESDAY, THE 18TH JUNE 2008 / 28TH JYAISHTA 1930 MACA.No. 1340 of 2005() ----------------------- OPMV.577/2002 of MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS TRIBUNAL, THODUPUZHA .................... APPELLANT/PETITIONER ------------------------------------- RANJITH S.NAIR, S/O. SUKUMARAN NAIR, AGED 18 YEARS, SREENILAYAM HOUSE, ANAVILASOM P.O. BY ADV. SRI.P.C.CHACKO(PARATHANAM) SMT.ASHA CHACKO RESPONDENTS/ RESPONDENTS ------------------------ 1. MATHEW @ FIJU, S/O. JOSEPH, PALLIYADIYIL HOUSE, VANDIPERIYAR, NOW RESIDING AT CHELIMADA BHAGOM, KUMILY VILLAGE. 2. NEW INDIA ASSURANCE CO. LTD., KATTAPPANA. BY ADV. SRI.T.A.UNNIKRISHNAN FOR R1 SMT.RESHMI POULOSE FOR R1 SRI.JOY GEORGE FOR R2 THIS MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS APPEAL HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 18/06/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: M.N.KRISHNAN, J. -------------------------- M.A.C.A. No. 1340 OF 2005 --------------------- Dated this the 18th day of June, 2008 JUDGMENT This appeal is preferred against the award passed by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Thodupuzha, in OP(MV) 577/02. The claimant, aged 18 years alleged to be a cable worker, sustained injuries in a road accident as a result of which there was a fracture of lower 3rd of the left leg and a similar fracture of both bones of the right leg. He had also other injuries on the leg. Certainly he would have been under the plaster cast for a considerable number of days. The Tribunal has awarded him only a compensation of Rs. 20,595/- with 6% interest. It is against that decision, the present appeal is preferred by the claimant. 2. Heard the counsel for both sides. At the outset, I may like to point out that the compensation awarded is not in proportion to the injuries sustained. The Tribunal has rejected the prayer for reimbursement of medical expenses on the ground that the purpose for which it is issued was not stated in the bill. The hospital authorities issues bills only for treatment and therefore it shall not be a ground to reject the same, even if the reason is not stated. Therefore, I allow Rs.3,000/- under that head. This young boy was in the hospital for a long time and he would have been immobile on account of the fracture of both bones of the leg. The Tribunal had only awarded Rs.8,000/- as compensation for pain and suffering which has MACA No.1340/05 2 atleast to be enhanced to Rs.10,000/-. Therefore there will be an increase of Rs.2,000/- under that head. It is certain that he would have required the assistance of somebody, both in the hospital as well in the house, for his day to day routine activities and therefore, I grant a sum of Rs.1,000/- under that head. It is true that the disability certificate has not been produced in this case. But it has to be understood that there has been a fracture on the left leg and fracture of both bones of the right leg. Therefore, it would have taken a considerable length of time for the young man to come back to his normal activities. Certainly he would have suffered loss of amenities and enjoyment in life. I award him Rs.7,000/- under that head. When it is so, the claimant will be entitled to a additional compensation of Rs.13,000/-. Therefore, the MACA is partly allowed and the claimant is entitled to an additional compensation of Rs.13,000/- with 7 % interest on the said sum from the date of petition till realisation from the respondents. The Insurance company is directed to deposit the amount within a period of 60 days from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment. M.N.KRISHNAN, JUDGE vps MACA No.1340/05 3 MACA No.1340/05 4