IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE M.N.KRISHNAN WEDNESDAY, THE 20TH AUGUST 2008 / 29TH SRAVANA 1930 M.A.C.A. No. 652 of 2007(B) -------------------------- O.P(MV).586/1999 of PRINCIPALMOTOR ACCIDENTS CLAIMS TRIBUNAL, KOZHIKODE. .................... APPELLANT/PETITIONER IN THE OP(MV).: -------------------------------------------------- ABDULLAKUTTY @ ABDULLAH, S/O.HAMZA, V ATTARPARAMBIL HOUSE, KANTHAKKAD, POST KONDOTTY, MALAPPURAM. BY ADV. SRI.K.M.JAMALUDHEEN SMT.LATHA PRABHAKARAN RESPONDENTS/ RESPONDENTS IN THE O.P(MV.): ------------------------------------------------------- 1. K.V.ELDO, S/O.VARGHESE, KOKKASERY HOUSE, MATTOOR POST, KALADI, ERNAKULAM. 2. THE ORIENTAL INSURANCE CO.LTD., DIVISIONAL OFFICE, PATTAMANA BUILDING, RAILWAY STATION ROAD, ALUVA, ERNAKULAM. 3. C.K.AHAMMED KUTTY, S/O.MUHAMMED MASTER, CHOLAKANDYIL VEEDU, MONGAM POST, MALAPPURAM. 4. THE UNITED INDIA INSURANCE CO.LTD., BRANCH OFFICE, UP HILL, MALAPPURAM. BY ADV. SRI.PMM.NAJEEB KHAN - R4 SRI.M.JACOB MURICKAN - R2 SRI.BABU S. NAIR - R3 THIS MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS APPEAL HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 20 /08 /2008 , THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: M.N. KRISHNAN, J. ------------------------------ M.A.C.A.No. 652 of 2007 ------------------------------ Dated this the 20th day of August, 2008 JUDGMENT This appeal is preferred against the award of Principal Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Kozhikode in O.P(M.V) No. 586 of 1999. The claimant sustained injuries in a road accident. As a result of it he had a fracture on the right thumb. A perusal of the O.P. Ticket would reveal that he had a '4x3' centimeter prolonged lacerated wound over the thumb with fracture. His nail was also removed. It is also found that he had a dislocation and further a small bony fragment had to be removed. He had undergone treatment for sometime and the compensation awarded appears to be not adequate. When a person's thumb is fractured with, where by which a small portion has to be removed, certainly would have prevented him from doing work for 6 to 8 weeks, for which I award him an amount of Rs. 3,000/- as loss of earning. The injury causing removal of a portion of bone and a deep lacerated wound would have made him suffer excruciating pain. M.A.C.A.No. 652 / 2006 Page numbers Similarly, it would have also caused him temporary disability and loss of amenities for some point of time. So I enhance compensation for pain and suffering as well as loss of amenities also at the rate of Rs. 2,000/- each. Therefore, the claimant will be entitled to get an additional compensation of Rs. 7,000/-. 2. It is seen that the Tribunal has exonerated the Insurance Company totally. It is not correct for the reason the claimant is 3rd party and when there is a breach of policy condition, the Insurance company has to satisfy the claim of 3rd party and get it reimbursed and so the award of the Tribunal below has to be modified to that extent also. The second respondent Insurance Company is directed to deposit the amount and get it reimbursed from the first respondent. In the resultant, the M.A.C.A is partly allowed and the claimant is awarded an additional compensation of Rs. 7,000/- with 6% interest on the said sum from the date of petition till realisation. The second respondent Insurance Company is directed to deposit the amount within a period of 60 days from the date of receipt of copy of the judgment. It is also made clear that the Insurance Company has to deposit the M.A.C.A.No. 652 / 2006 Page numbers original award also with interest and get the entire amount reimbursed from the first respondent. M. N. KRISHNAN, JUDGE scm