IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE M.N.KRISHNAN FRIDAY, THE 20TH JUNE 2008 / 30TH JYAISHTA 1930 MACA.No. 1197 of 2004() --------------------------------- OPMV.1533/1995 of MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS TRIBUNAL, KOTTAYAM .................... APPELLANT/PETITIONER IN OP(MV) NO.1533 OF 1995 ----------------------------------------------------------------------------- PAPPUKUTTY, S/O. KOCHUKUNJU, PUTHENKALAYILL HOUSE, KOTTAMALA P.O., IDUKKI DIST. BY ADV. SRI.P.M.NATESAN SRI.P.K.MURALEEDHARAN RESPONDENTS/RESPONDENTS IN OP(MV)NO.1533 OF 1995: -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 1. SAJI GEORGE, S/O. GEORGE, PANAKUZHY HOUSE, KADUTHURUTHY P.O., KOTTAYAM DIST. 2. A.A.THOMAS, ELAMPASSERIL HOUSE, KARIMKUNNAM P.O., THODUPUZHA, IDUKKI DIST. 3. THE DIVISIONAL MANAGER, NATIONAL INSURANCE COMPANY LTD., C.S.I. SQUARE, BAKER HILL, KOTTAYAM. BY ADV. SMT.SARAH SALVY - R3 THIS MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS APPEAL HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 20/06/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: M.N. KRISHNAN, J. = = = = = = = = = = = = = = M.A.C.A. NO. 1197 OF 2004 = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = Dated this the 20th day of June, 2008. J U D G M E N T This appeal is preferred against the award of the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Kottayam in O.P.(MV)1533/95 whereby it rejected the petition for want of evidence and had further held that Exts.A1 to A3 are mutually contradictory. It is true that a wound certificate is produced but that is not an end of it. If there are other acceptable documents certainly it has to be relied upon. 2. First I will find out whether there is a mutual contradiction in the documents produced. It is the case of the appellant that immediately after the accident he was taken to the Medical College Hospital where he was examined by the Doctors and it is seen that he had suffered a lacerated injury on the chin through and through which was sutured, there was abrasions over the knee and four of his teeth became loosened. He was discharged from the observation ward on the same day. Thereafter it is M.A.C.A. 1197 OF 2004 -:2:- submitted that he had gone to the hospital at Vaikom and the certificate issued by the Vaikom Hospital authorities would reveal that he was treated as an inpatient from 7.12.94 to 20.12.94 by I.P.No.9227. There is no inconsistency with these documents for the reason that immediately on the discharge from the Medical College Hospital he had gone and admitted in the Vaikom Hospital on the very same day. Ext.A3 only gives the narration of the details of the injuries. Therefore I do not find any mutual contradiction between the documents and therefore the finding of the Tribunal on that ground is set aside. There is no dispute for the insurance company that there was an accident involving a bus. Documents Ext.A1 to A3 would be sufficient to show that the poor claimant also was involved in the accident and sustained injuries. 3. The next question to be considered is regarding the quantum. Documents available would show that he had a through and through injury in the chin and four of his teeth became mobile and he was treated as an inpatient in the M.A.C.A. 1197 OF 2004 -:3:- hospital for a period of 14 days. So taking into consideration these aspects I proceed to fix the compensation. He was aged 54 at the time of the accident and was a coolie by profession. On account of these injuries it is certain that he would not have been in a position to do work for a period of two months. Taking the notional income at Rs.1250/- per month I award a sum of Rs.2,500/- towards loss of earnings. He was an inpatient in the hospital for 14 days and he had visited the Medical College Hospital, Kottayam and later came to Vaikom. So towards transport expenses I grant him Rs.500/-. Certainly on account of the injury on the teeth and lips he would not have been in a position to take solid food and therefore liquid diet would have been provided to him. Towards the same I award Rs.500/-. He was an inpatient for 14 days certainly he would have purchased some medicines also. Taking into consideration all these aspects I award a sum of Rs.1,500/- towards treatment expenses plus bystander's expenses. M.A.C.A. 1197 OF 2004 -:4:- 4. Nature of injuries would itself reveal it is a through and through injury by which one can envisage the excruciating pain that the person must have undergone. Accident is of the year 1994 and taking that aspect I award him a compensation of Rs.5,000/- for pain and sufferings. Certainly there would have been temporary loss of amenities and enjoyment in life for a short period of time for which I award him Rs.2,000/-. Therefore the claimant will be entitled to a compensation of Rs.12,000/-. The award passed by the Tribunal is set aside and an award in favour of the claimant is passed as follows. The claimant is awarded a compensation of Rs.12,000/- with 7% 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/-