IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.PADMANABHAN NAIR FRIDAY, THE 29TH FEBRUARY 2008 / 10TH PHALGUNA 1929 MACA.No. 540 of 2004() --------------------------------- OPMV.535/1999 of MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS TRIBUNAL, PERUMBAVOOR .................... APPELLANT/PETITIONER IN O.P (M.V) -------------------------------------------------- FRANCIS M.C., S/O.CHACKO, MENACHERY HOUSE, CHONANGARAM KUNNAM KARA, MANJAPRA VILLAGE, MANJAPRA.P.O. BY ADV. SRI.SUNIL CYRIAC RESPONDENTS: RESPONDENTS 1 & 2 IN O.P(M.V) -------------------------------------------------------------------- 1. MR.B.SRIRANGAM, S/O.BATHU NAICKER, 82/8 MORIMEDU, SALEM MANI ROAD, MALLASAMUDRAM. P.O., TRICHENGODE, TAMIL NADU-637 211. 2. UNITED INDIA INSURANCE COMPANY LIMITED BRANCH OFFICE - 170 901, KUMAR COMPLEX- 146ZN-ANNASALAI, TRICHENGOD-637 211, TAMIL NADU. BY ADV. SRI.P.JAYASANKAR THIS MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS APPEAL HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 29/02/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: K. PADMANABHAN NAIR, J. = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = M.A.C.A. NO.540 OF 2004 = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = Dated this the 20th day of February, 2008 J U D G M E N T -------------------- Owner of a goods Autorikshaw which sustained damages on account of the accident is the appellant in this appeal. On 8.2.1999 a collision took place between the Autorikshaw owned by the appellant and a lorry bearing Reg. No.TN-28U- 0313 which was driven by the first respondent. The Autorikshaw sustained damage. It was alleged that the accident occurred due to the rash or negligent driving of the lorry by its driver. Appellant filed the petition claiming Rs.17,100/- as damages. He produced bills for Rs.11,020/- which the Tribunal did not rely. But on account of the damages noted in Exhibit A5, Tribunal awarded a consolidated amount of Rs.3,000/- as compensation. Aggrieved by the quantum of compensation awarded by the Tribunal, petitioner himself had filed this appeal. 2. The vehicle involved in this case is a goods Autorikshaw. Exhibit A5 series are the reports of the Assistant Motor Vehicle Inspector, prepared immediately after accident. M.A.C.A. NO.540 OF 2004 -: 2 :- It shows that the cabin body of the Autorikshaw was completely damaged and front glass crumbled. Exhibit A2 shows that most of the work done was in respect of the front cabin. Of course, no survey report was prepared and produced. It is not possible to accept Exhibit A2 as such. But considering the fact that the entire front cabin of the goods Autorikshaw was damaged, I am of the view that an amount Rs.5,000/- can be awarded as additional compensation to the appellant in addition to the compensation awarded by the Tribunal. In the result, the appeal is allowed in part. An award is passed in favour of the appellant allowing him to recover an additional amount of Rs.5,000/- with 7.5% from the date of petition till date of realisation. The second respondent is directed to deposit that amount also. On deposit, the appellant can withdraw the entire amount. K. PADMANABHAN NAIR, JUDGE. vsv K. PADMANABHAN NAIR, J. ===================== M.F.A. ===================== J U D G M E N T ------------------------------------------- TH FEBRUARY, 2008