IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.PADMANABHAN NAIR THURSDAY, THE 28TH FEBRUARY 2008 / 9TH PHALGUNA 1929 MFA.No. 77 of 2002(B) --------------------- OPMV.1855/1994 of MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS TRIBUNAL, MANJERI .................... APPELLANT: APPELLANT IN M.F.A.-PETITIONER IN O.P(MV): ----------------------------------------------------- UROLATH NIRMAL KUMAR, S/O.U.PARUKUTTY AMMA, RESIDING AT KARULAI AMSOM DESOM, P.O.KARULAI, ERNAD TALUK,MALAPPURAM DIST. BY ADV. SRI.S.V.BALAKRISHNA IYER(SR.) RESPONDENTS: RESPONDENT IN M.F.A.-RESPONDENTS IN O.P(MV): --------------------------------------------------------- 1. VALLIKAPATTA AMARUDEEN, S/O.HAMZA, KODUR AMSOM, UMMATHOOR, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT. 2. V.JAYAPRAKASH, S/O. AYYAPPAN, VELUTHEDATHODI HOUSE, DOWN HILL, MALAPPURAM. 3. UNITED INDIA INSURANCE CO.LTD., POST BOX NO.11, UP HILL, MALAPPURAM. R3 BY ADV. SRI.MATHEWS JACOB THIS MISC. FIRST APPEAL HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 28/02/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: K. PADMANABHAN NAIR ,J. ------------------------------------------------- M.F.A.No.77 of 2002 ------------------------------------------------- Dated, this the 28th day of February, 2008 JUDGMENT The claimant in O.P.(MV) No.1855/1994 on the file of the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Manjeri is the appellant. On 28.1.1994 appellant met with an accident and sustained injuries. He filed a petition claiming compensation. First respondent remained exparte. Second respondent entered appearance. Insurer filed a written statement admitting the insurance coverage of the vehicle, but raising a contention that there was no negligence on the part of the driver. Quantum of compensation claimed was also disputed. Tribunal found that appellant is entitled to get Rs.20,000/- as compensation and directed the insurer to pay the amount. Dissatisfied with the quantum of compensation awarded the claimant himself has filed this appeal. 2. In the award Tribunal had stated that appellant sustained contusion right little finger and abrasion 10 x 3 cm right elbow. But the wound certificate itself shows that x-ray revealed that appellant sustained a fracture to the right big toe. It is seen that the appellant appeared before the Medical Board who assessed the disability at 1%. Tribunal has not taken into account the fracture sustained. Considering all aspects of the matter I am of the view that Tribunal ought to have awarded another Rs.6,500/- towards compensation for disability. So appellant is entitled to get an amount of Rs.6,500/- as additional compensation with 7.5% MFA No.77/2002 2 interest per annum from the date of petition till the date of realisation. In the result, appeal is allowed in part. An award is passed in favour of the appellant allowing him to recover an amount of Rs.6,500/- as additional compensation with 7.5% interest per annum from the date of petition till the date of realisation. Insurer is directed to pay that amount also . On deposit appellant can withdraw the entire amount. K. PADMANABHAN NAIR, JUDGE. cks MFA No.77/2002 3 K.PADMANABHAN NAIR, J. M.F.A.No.77 of 2002 JUDGMENT 28th February, 2008.