IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE M.N.KRISHNAN TUESDAY, THE 20TH JULY 2010 / 29TH ASHADHA 1932 MACA.No. 2511 of 2009(B) ------------------------------------- OPMV.316/2004 of MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS TRIBUNAL, IRINJALAKUDA .................... APPELLANT(S): PETITIONER ---------------------------------- SINTO, S/O.VADAKKEPEEDIKA ANTO, ALOOR VILLAGE, DESOM, MUKUNDAPURAM TALUK, THRISSUR DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.V.BINOY RAM RESPONDENT(S)/ RESPONDENTS: ---------------------------------------- 1. LIJITH, S/O.KUNJOLIPARAMBIL JOLLY, ELANDIKKARA, PUTHENVELIKARA. 2. THE NEW INDIA ASSURANCE CO. LTD., BRANCH OFFICE, GOVT. PRESS ROAD, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 3. SMT.HARIFA BEEVI, W/O.THEDAVILAYIL IBRAHIMKUTTY, KUNNATHOOR. 4. A.K.ANIL, PCK BHAVAN, X11/160, THUNDATHIL, KARIYAVATTOM, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM DISTRICT. THIS MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS APPEAL HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 20/07/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: M.N. KRISHNAN, J. = = = = = = = = = = = = = = M.A.C.A. NO. 2511 OF 2009 = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = Dated this the 20th day of July, 2010. J U D G M E N T This appeal is preferred against the award of the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Irinjalakuda in O.P.(MV)316/04. The claimant, a 17 year old boy, sustained injuries in a road accident and the Tribunal awarded him a compensation of Rs.62,200/- of which Rs.37,600/- represents medical expenses alone. Dissatisfied with the quantum the claimant has come up in appeal. 2. A perusal of the award would reveal that he had sustained a fracture on both bones of the right leg. He was treated as an inpatient initially for 23 days and later for 3 days. A disability certificate of 9% was issued. But neither the doctor nor the boy was examined and therefore the Court did not grant any disability compensation but granted Rs.8,000/- towards loss of amenities and enjoyment. Learned counsel for the appellant had made available before me for perusal a copy of the disability certificate. Even the M.A.C.A. 2511 OF 2009 -:2:- learned Tribunal has noted that there is a bulging on the fracture site. For an young boy aged 16 or 17 years the very bulging would result in difficulties and it is further reported by the doctor that there is a mild stiffness on the ankle and there is also limitation of movement to some extent. So it has to be stated the boy has sustained some disability. So in the absence of any concrete evidence I feel at least a minimum of 4% disability can be taken in this case. Being a boy if the income is taken at Rs.1,500/- per month and a disability of 4% is applied the annual loss of earning would come to Rs.720/- which is to be multiplied by 18(2009 ACJ 1298(Sarala Varma v. Delhi Transport Corporation)) then it would come to Rs.12,960/-. Since disability compensation is awarded I further award only Rs.6,000/- towards loss of amenities thus making it a total amount of Rs.18,960/- out of which Rs.8,000/- is granted. So it will come to Rs.10,960/-. It can be seen the boy has undergone a very prolonged treatment and was in hospital for 23 days. Considering the application of plaster cast, thereafter M.A.C.A. 2511 OF 2009 -:3:- readmitted for removal of implantation etc. I feel a further amount of Rs.5,000/- can be granted towards pain and sufferings which would make an additional compensation of Rs.15,960/- which is rounded as Rs.16,000/-. In the result the MACA is partly allowed and the claimant is awarded an additional compensation of Rs.16,000/- with 7% interest on the said sum from the date of petition till realisation and the New India Assurance Company is directed to deposit the same within a period of sixty days from the date of receipt of a copy of the judgment. M.N. KRISHNAN, JUDGE. ul/-