IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.M.JOSEPH & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE M.L.JOSEPH FRANCIS TUESDAY, THE 9TH JUNE 2009 / 19TH JYAISHTA 1931 MACA.No. 908 of 2005() ---------------------- OPMV.1275/1995 of MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS TRIBUNAL, PALAKKAD .................... APPELLANT(S): APPELLANT/PETITIONER ---------------------------------- SIVA PRAKASH, S/O.KUNJU, KORIYARCHALLA, KANNIMARY (P.O), CHITTUR TALUK. BY ADV. SRI.A.R.GANGADAS ADV.A.S. BRIJESH RESPONDENT(S): --------------- 1. P.T.USMAN, S/O.LATE ABOOBACKER, U.A.MANZIL, MANKAVU, KOZHIKODE DISTRICT. 2. NATIONAL INSURANCE CO. LTD., BRANCH OFFICE, CALICUT. 3. PAZHANIMALA, S/O.KANDACHAMI, KORIYAR CHALLA, KUTTIPPALLAN, CHITTUR TALUK. 4. THE ORIENTAL INSURANCE CO. LTD., BRANCH OFFICE, P.B.NO. 20, SHOBHA T.S.M. COMPLEX, V.H.ROAD, PALAKKAD. ADV. SRI.LAL GEORGE FOR R.2 SRI.MATHEWS JACOB, SENIOR ADVOCATE FOR R4 SRI.P.JACOB MATHEW FOR R4 THIS MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS APPEAL HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 09/06/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: K.M. JOSEPH & M.L. JOSEPH FRANCIS, JJ. ```````````````````````````````````````````````````` M.A.C.A. No. 908 OF 2005 ```````````````````````````````````````````````````` Dated this the 9th day of June, 2009 J U D G M E N T Joseph, J. This is a case coming up for admission. The appellant is the petitioner in a petition filed under section 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act. We heard learned counsel for the appellant as also learned counsel appearing on behalf of respondents 2 and 4. This is a case where the Tribunal has ordered the 2nd respondent Insurance company to shoulder the liability. This is an appeal relating to enhancement. Learned counsel for the 2nd respondent submits that the company is liable even if any enhancement is made. In such circumstances, we dispense with notice to respondents 1 and 3. We are disposing of the appeal after having heard the counsel as aforesaid. 2. The appellant allegedly was working as the Manager in a toddy shop. He was aged 29 years. He suffered injuries. The MACA.908/05 : 2 : total amount awarded is Rs.63,850/-. The appellant complains about the quantum. 3. Learned counsel for the appellant submits that the appellant was in hospital for 16 days. The medical certificate shows disability in an extent of 10% but what is granted is only 6%. He suffered shortening of the leg as a result of the fracture of the femur. He would submit that he should have been granted compensation on the basis of 10% disability but it is reduced to 5%. There is no reason given. Still further, he would contend that the monthly income should have been fixed at Rs.3,000/-. He also points out that the interest awarded is only 6%. 4. After having heard the counsel, we feel that the Tribunal has not accepted the certificate without assigning any reason. There is shortening of leg. So, we feel that we can adopt disability at 8% instead of 5%. There is no evidence for enhancement of income from Rs.2000. We also feel that the interest rate should be enhanced from 6% to 7.5%. Accordingly, the appeal is partly allowed and the appellant is allowed to realise a further sum of Rs.13,000/- (Rs.12,960/- rounded to Rs.13,000/-) MACA.908/05 : 3 : with interest at the rate of 7.5% from the date of the petition till the date of realisation. The original amount awarded by the Tribunal will also bear interest at 7.5% instead of 6%. (K.M.JOSEPH, JUDGE) (M.L. JOSEPH FRANCIS, JUDGE) aks