IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE M.N.KRISHNAN WEDNESDAY, THE 23RD SEPTEMBER 2009 / 1ST ASWINA 1931 MACA.No. 1675 of 2008() ---------------------------------- OPMV.2550/2002 of MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS TRIBUNAL, KOZHIKODE .................... APPELLANT(S): PETITIONER IN OP (MV) ------------------------ T. DEVADASAN, S/O. PADMANABHAN, AGED 34, THAMARATH HOUSE, P.O. KANNANCHERI, CALICUT. BY ADVS.MR.K.M.JAMALUDHEEN SMT.LATHA PRABHAKARAN RESPONDENT(S): RESPONDENTS -------------------------- 1. K. SEETHY, S/O.KUNHIMARAKKAR, XI/402, KOLADIKKAL VEEDU, P.O. KOLALESS, EDAPPAL, MALAPPURAM. 2. SHAMEER.M, S/O. BADHARUDEEN, AGED 30, MACHILAKKATH VEEDU, P.O. BEYPORE, CALICUT. 3. NATIONAL INSURANCE CO. LTD., NOOR COMPLEX, MAVOOR ROAD, ARAYIDATHUPALAM, CALICUT. R3 BY ADV. MR.E.M.JOSEPH THIS MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS APPEAL HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 23/09/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: tss M.N.KRISHNAN, J. ........................................... M.A.C.A.NO.1675 OF 2008 ............................................. Dated this the 23rd day of September, 2009 J U D G M E N T R1 and R3 served. Notice to R2 dispensed with as he had chosen to remain ex-parte before the Tribunal and as the accident and policy are admitted. 2. This is an appeal preferred against the award of the Claims Tribunal, Kozhikode in OP(MV)No.2550/2002. The claimant, a 28 year old painter by profession, sustained injuries in a road accident and the Tribunal awarded him a compensation of Rs.36,883/= with 7.5% interest. It is against the same, the claimant has come up in appeal for enhancement. 3. Heard the learned counsel for the appellant as well as the insurance company. A perusal of the document produced in this case would reveal that the claimant had a split depressed fracture lateral condyle right tibia. He was admitted on 17.3.2002, operated on 18.3.2002 and discharged on 27.4.2002. Thereafter he had again visited the hospital on 16th May, 13th May and 20th June of 2002. Then on 29.7.2002 he was re-admitted in the hospital and a : 2 : M.A.C.A.NO.1675 OF 2008 surgery was done to remove the implant and was discharged on 12.8.2002. So, this would show that the claimant was treated as an inpatient for 51 days in the hospital. The Tribunal accepted the disability at 5% issued by the medical board but has committed some calculation mistake as well in the award. Being a painter by profession, I think it will be only just and proper to fix the income at Rs.2,000/=. When the disability is taken at 5% and a multiplier of 17 is used as seen from the latest decision, the disability compensation would come to Rs.20,400/=, out of which Rs.12,200/= had been granted. So, under that head the claimant is entitled to an additional compensation of Rs.8,200/=. Towards loss of amenities and enjoyment, an amount of Rs.5,000/= has to be granted. When the income is taken at Rs.2,000/= towards loss of earnings, another Rs.1,500/= has to be granted. Considering the period of hospitalization and number of visits to the hospital, the incidental charge is enhanced by Rs.1,000/= and the transport charge by Rs.500/=. The prolonged period of hospitalization would have made the claimant to : 3 : M.A.C.A.NO.1675 OF 2008 suffer a lot and therefore, I grant a further compensation of Rs.3,800/= towards pain and sufferings. Thus the claimant will be entitled to an additional compensation of Rs.20,000/=. In the result, the MACA is partly allowed and the claimant is awarded an dditional compensation of Rs.20,000/= with 7.5% interest on the said sum from the date of the petition till realisation and the insurance company is directed to deposit the said amount within a period of 60 days from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment. M.N. KRISHNAN, JUDGE. cl