IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE M.N.KRISHNAN THURSDAY, THE 30TH OCTOBER 2008 / 8TH KARTHIKA 1930 MACA.No. 41 of 2004(B) ---------------------------------- OP(MV).NO.1279/1997 OF MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS TRIBUNAL, IRINJALAKUDA .................... APPELLANT/ PETITIONER IN OP(MV): ------------------------------------------------------ E.P.TITTO (MINOR) AGED 10 YEARS, REPRESENTED BY HIS FATHER POULOSE, EDAPPULLY HOUSE, KOTTANELLOOR P.O., MUUNDAPURAM TALUK. BY ADV. SRI.P.V.BABY, ADV. SRI.A.N.SANTHOSH. RESPONDENTS/ RESPONDENTS IN OP (MV): ---------------------------------------------------------------- 1. P.V.RAJAN, S/O. VALLON, PARAKKATTUKUNNIL HOUSE, THUMBUR P.O. 2. P.V.MITHRAN, S/O. VALLON, PARAKKATTUKUNNIL HOUSE, PARAKKATTUKUNNU P.O. 3. UNITED INDIA INSURANCE CO.LTD., MAIN ROAD, IRINJALAKUDA. R3 BY ADV. SRI.P.MURALEEDHARAN. THIS MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS APPEAL HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 30/10/2008,THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: prv. M.N.KRISHNAN, J ===================== MACA No.41 OF 2004 ===================== Dated this the 30th day of October 2008 JUDGMENT This appeal is preferred against the award of the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Irinjalakkuda in O.P.(MV)No.1279 of 1997. The claimant, a 4 ½ year old boy sustained injuries in a road accident. He has been awarded a compensation of Rs.30,000/-. Dissatisfied with the same the claimant has come up in appeal. 2. The boy had sustained multiple abrasions over the left side of face, parietal area and lips and had sustained injuries on the left frontal sub dural haematoma. Learned counsel for the claimant would submit that the boy had sustained fracture of the parietal bone which is revealed from the scan report and it is noted by the Tribunal in the award itself. A disability certificate of 15% was produced before the Tribunal, but the Doctor was not examined and it was not issued by the hospital where the boy had undergone treatment. The Tribunal directed the boy to be present in person and on appearance as well as putting questions to the boy the Tribunal was satisfied that there was no mental disorder to the boy and he was behaving MACA 41/2004 -:2:- normally. There is nothing to show regarding the loss of memory or the slowness in educational field. When it is so, it is not possible for this Court to interfere with the said award especially when a document which should have been proved is not proved. Further, there is not even a scrap of paper to show that the boy had undergone any treatment after he was discharged from Little Flower Hospital. At the same time he was not neurologically deficient. I do not find any reason to interfere with the award passed by the Tribunal. Therefore the appeal lacks merit and the same is dismissed. M.N.KRISHNAN, JUDGE Cdp/-