IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.M.JOSEPH & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE M.L.JOSEPH FRANCIS WEDNESDAY, THE 3RD JUNE 2009 / 13TH JYAISHTA 1931 MACA.No. 384 of 2003(C) ----------------------- OPMV.332/1996 of MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS TRIBUNAL, IRINJALAKUDA .................... APPELLANT(S): PETITIONER ------------------------ C.V.VASANTHAN S/O. VELAYUDHAN, CHATTAMPILLY HOUSE, NADAVARAMBU P.O., MUKUNDAPURAM TALUK. BY ADV. SRI.P.V.BABY SRI.A.N.SANTHOSH RESPONDENT(S): RESPONDENTS -------------------------- 1. MANAGING DIRECTOR, KERALA STATE ROAD TRANSPORT CORPORATION, TRIVANDRUM. 2. DASSAN S/O. VELAYUDHAN, PUTHANPARAMBIL HOUSE, ELAMKUNNAPPUZHA, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT. ADV. SRI.JOHNSON P.JOHN,SC,KSRTC THIS MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS APPEAL HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 03/06/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: K.M. JOSEPH & M.L. JOSEPH FRANCIS, JJ. ```````````````````````````````````````````````````` M.A.C.A. No. 384 OF 2003 C ```````````````````````````````````````````````````` Dated this the 3rd day of June, 2009 J U D G M E N T Joseph, J. Appellant is the claimant in a petition filed under section 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act. He suffered injuries in an accident took place on 10.7.1995. He stands awarded a sum of Rs.85,000/- as total compensation. The complaint is regarding the inadequacy of the compensation. 2. We heard learned counsel for the appellant and learned counsel appearing on behalf of the KSRTC. Learned counsel for the appellant would submit that the appellant was working as a Carpenter. The monthly income has been fixed at Rs.1,500/-. This is too low, he points out. He has examined himself as PW1 besides examining the doctor as PW2 and marked Exts.A1 to A8. His further complaint is regarding the reduction of percentage of disability from 20% to 10%. Ext.A8 is the disability certificate issued by Dr.K.V.Prasad. It is pointed out that the very same doctor was examined as PW2 and there is no MACA.384/03 : 2 : reason to reduce the percentage. Still further he points out that the appellant was hospitalized for 21 days. His spleen was removed and surgery was done. He stands awarded only Rs.5,000/- for pain and suffering, he complains. For loss of amenities he is awarded only Rs.2,400/-, it is pointed out. The learned counsel for the respondent would point out that there is no documentary evidence for fixing higher income. As far as the question of income is concerned, we are of the view that the income can be fixed at Rs.1,800/-. We notice that he was working as a Carpenter and he had produced documentary evidence. He has examined himself. In view of the fact that the year is 1995, we fix the monthly income at Rs.1,800/- instead of Rs.1,500/-. 3. We feel that in view of the number of days he was hospitalized and the nature of the injuries suffered, it would be appropriate to award him Rs.5,000/- more towards pain and suffering. Likewise, he can be awarded a sum of Rs.5,000/- more towards discomfort and loss of amenities. It is noted that he has lost his spleen as a result of the accident. On that basis, the appellant would be entitled to enhancement in compensation on MACA.384/03 : 3 : the basis of the income we have fixed. Accordingly, the appellant is entitled to Rs.6,120/- more towards disability, Rs.5,000/- more towards pain and suffering, Rs.5,000/- more towards discomfort and loss of amenities and Rs.1,800/- more on account of loss of earning. Thus, the appellant would be entitled to Rs.17,920/- rounded to Rs.18,000/-. We do not see any reason to enhance the percentage of disability. Accordingly, the appeal is allowed in part and the appellant is allowed to realise Rs.18,000/- with interest at 7.5% from the date of the petition till the date of realization. (K.M.JOSEPH, JUDGE) (M.L. JOSEPH FRANCIS, JUDGE) aks