IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE M.N.KRISHNAN MONDAY, THE 10TH NOVEMBER 2008 / 19TH KARTHIKA 1930 MACA.No. 1975 of 2007(D) ----------------------- OPMV.2489/1999 of MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS TRIBUNAL, KOZHIKODE .................... APPELLANT(S): /PETITIONER ---------------------------------- ABOOBACKER.N.P., AGED 43 S/O. SYED ALI,'CHANDRIKA MAHAL', GANDHI ROAD, NEAR KSEB OFFICE, KACHERI AMSOM DESOM,KOZHIKODE. BY ADV. SRI.K.M.FIROZ RESPONDENT(S): RESPONDENT ------------------------------------ 1. K.KESAVAN S/O.KUNNIKANNAN NAIR MEETHALE PUTHIYOTH HOUSE,EDAKKULAM AMSOM, KOYILANDY DESOM,CHEEYETTU KAVU, CHELIYA ROAD, KOZHIKODE. 2. K.K.CHANDRAN, S/O.ACHUTHAN, KEEZHELLATH KUTTY HOUSE, MELAYOOR AMSOM, NEAR CHELIYA POST OFFICE. 3. UNITED INDIA INSURANCE COMPANY LTD BRANCH OFFICE, VELIMANNA BUILDING THAMARASSERY, KOZHIKODE. ADV. SRI.J.MATHAPPAN FOR R3 SMT.K.SHERIN MOHAN FOR R3 THIS MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS APPEAL HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 10/11/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: M.N. KRISHNAN, J. = = = = = = = = = = = = = = M.A.C.A. NO. 1975 OF 2007 = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = Dated this the 10th day of November, 2008. J U D G M E N T This appeal is preferred against the award of the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Kozhikode in O.P.(MV)2489/99. The claimant, a 35 year old employee of the Chandrika News Daily sustained injuries in a road accident and he has been awarded a compensation of Rs.6,720/-. It is against that decision, the claimant has come in appeal. 2. The Tribunal suspected the documents produced, the corrections in it and had even felt that there has been manipulation of the document. I have called for the records and perused the records. The whole doubt entertained by the Tribunal is regarding the bimalleolar fracture, i.e. a fracture on the ankle. It is true that there is a correction of 1 into 2 regarding the discharge. But a perusal of the discharge card would convincingly show that he had undergone a surgery on 15.6.99. Therefore it must be a mistake committed by the authorities when they put the date M.A.C.A. 1975 OF 2007 -:2:- as 13.6.99 as the date of discharge whereas it would have been only on 23.6.99 as pointed out therein. It is further amplified by later endorsement in the discharge card. The first document namely wound certificate itself would show that there was a suspected fracture on the right ankle joint and he was referred to the Medical College Hospital, Kozhikode as orthopedic surgeon was not available at General Hospital, Kozhikode. So I am convinced that there is no such manipulation as observed by the Court below. 3. The very same Tribunal had accepted the disability certificate in this case and also has awarded a compensation under no fault liability. Now it turns round and suspects the certificate is not correct. I am afraid whether a Tribunal can take such a stand at all. Therefore it is seen from the documents that the claimant had sustained a bimalleolar fracture and was treated as an inpatient in the hospital for 20 days. Therefore it requires enhancement of compensation. Therefore I recalculate the compensation as follows. M.A.C.A. 1975 OF 2007 -:3:- I award a sum of Rs.2,000/- more towards loss of earnings. Considering the period of hospitalisation and rest that would have been required after discharge I enhance the compensation by Rs.3,000/-. When the disability compensation is taken into consideration, it has to be stated that there will not be any loss of earnings till the date of retirement, being a private employee till the age of 60 years. So I fix his income thereafter at Rs.2,000/- and when it is calculated at 5% with a multiplier of 5 it will come to Rs.6,000/-. I award a further sum of Rs.5,000/- towards loss of amenities and enjoyment in life. So the claimant will be entitled to an additional compensation of Rs.16,000/-. In the result the MACA is partly allowed and the claimant is awarded an additional compensation of Rs.16,000/- with 6% interest on the said sum from the date of petition till realisation and the insurance company is directed to deposit the balance amount due after adjusting the amount of compensation deposited or paid u/s 140 of the M.A.C.A. 1975 OF 2007 -:4:- M.V. Act within a period of sixty days from the date of receipt of a copy of the judgment. M.N. KRISHNAN, JUDGE. ul/-