IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE M.N.KRISHNAN TUESDAY, THE 2ND SEPTEMBER 2008 / 11TH BHADRA 1930 MACA.No. 1903 of 2007(C) ---------------------------- OPMV.377/2000 of MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS TRIBUNAL, ALAPPUZHA .................... APPELLANTS/PETITIONERS ---------------------------------- MAHESWARI, W/O.RAJEEV, KARUKAPARAMBIL VEEDU, NETHAJI P.O., NORTH ARYAD, ALAPPUZHA. BY ADV. SRI.A.C.DEVY RESPONDENTS: ------------- 1. ABDUL SAMAD, PADINJAREKARUKAYIL HOUSE, NEERKUNNAM, VANDANAM, ALAPPUZHA. 2. ORIENTAL INSURANCE CO.LTD., REP. BY DIVISIONAL MANAGER, DIVISIONAL OFFICE, THIRUVALLA. BY ADV. SRI.M.JACOB MURICKAN FOR R2 THIS MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS APPEAL HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 02/09/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: M.N. KRISHNAN, J. = = = = = = = = = = = = = = M.A.C.A. NO. 1903 OF 2007 = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = Dated this the 2nd day of September, 2008. J U D G M E N T This appeal is preferred against the award of the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Alappuzha in O.P.(MV)377/00. The claimant, a 30 year old lady, worker by profession sustained fracture on the radius, sprain on the right wrist, lacerated wound on the forehead and eyebrow. X-ray of the skull reveal orbital fracture and X-ray of the left wrist revealed fracture on the lower radius. She was treated as an inpatient in the hospital for 11 days and the doctor had issued a disability certificate showing it as 11.2%. The disability sustained is mainly on the basis of the restriction of movement of left wrist and the doctor fixed the disability at 11.2%. The Tribunal did not consider it at all for the reason that the disability certificate was obtained after three or four years after the accident and the doctor who had treated had not been examined. Disability issued and found after three years is a better document rather than a disability certificate M.A.C.A. 1903 OF 2007 -:2:- issued within a short period after the accident. It is true that the disability noted are not so serious so as to cause 11.2% disability. Therefore I fix the disability at 5% and income at Rs.1,500/-. When it is worked out the annual loss of earning would come to Rs.900/- which when multiplied by 17 would come to Rs.15,300/-. The claimant is also entitled to a minimum loss of amenities and enjoyment in life of Rs.3,000/-. So making it a total of Rs.18,300/-. The Tribunal has awarded only Rs.12,000/- under that head which means it requires an enhancement by Rs.6,300/-. It can be seen from the nature of injuries sustained by the poor lady that she had sustained a fracture in skull besides fracture on the radius and also lacerated wounds on the forehead, eyebrow etc. She had undergone a prolonged treatment. It is certain that she would have suffered excruciating pain and therefore I am inclined to enhance the compensation for loss of amenities by Rs.2,000/- more. Therefore the claimant will be entitled to an additional compensation of Rs.8,300/-. M.A.C.A. 1903 OF 2007 -:3:- In the result the MACA is partly allowed and the claimant is awarded an additional compensation of Rs.8,300/- with 6% interest on the said sum from the date of petition till realisation and the insurance 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/-