IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.M.JOSEPH & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE M.L.JOSEPH FRANCIS TUESDAY, THE 28TH JULY 2009 / 6TH SRAVANA 1931 MACA.No. 1062 of 2004() ---------------------------------- (AGAINST THE AWARD DATED 29.10.2002 IN OPMV.2170/1996 of MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS TRIBUNAL, ERNAKULAM ) .................... APPELLANT(S): PETITIONER ---------------------------------------- M.H.JAYA, AGED 24 YEARS, DAUGHTER OF SRI.M.S.HARIHARAN, F.A.C.T. QUARTERS NO. C59, UDYOGAMANDAL P.O. BY ADV. SRI.ANIL S.RAJ SMT.K.N.RAJANI SMT.NITHYA.K. RESPONDENT(S): RESPONDENTS ------------------------------------------------- 1. THE PROPRIETOR, KERALA UNIVERSAL LAMINERS, UNIVERSITY CENTRE P.O., COCHIN-22. 2. RAVI, S/O.KUMARAN, PURAMCHALIL HOUSE, NORTH OF MUTTAR BRIDGE, MUTTAR DESOM, ELOOR VILLAGE. 3. THE NEW INDIA ASSURANCE COMPANY LIMITED, CHANDRIKA BUILDING, COCHIN-11. 4. UNITED INDIA INSURANCE COMPANY LIMITED, ALUVA. R1 BY ADV. SRI.K.S.AJAYAGHOSH. R3 BY ADV. SRI.M.RAJAGOPALAN SRI.RAJIT R4 BY ADV SMT.P.K.SANTHAMMA THIS MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS APPEAL HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 28/07/2009 THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: K.M.JOSEPH & M.L.JOSEPH FRANCIS, JJ. ------------------------------------------------------ M.A.C.A.No.1062 of 2004 ---------------------------------------------- Dated, this the 28th day of July, 2009 J U D G M E N T K.M.Joseph, J. Appellant is the claimant in O.P.(MV) No.2170/1996. Aggrieved by the quantum of compensation awarded by the Tribunal this appeal is filed. 2. We heard the learned counsel for the appellant and learned counsel appearing on behalf of the insurance company namely the 3rd respondent. The counsel for the 4th respondent was also present. As against the claim for Rs.2,62,750/- the Tribunal has awarded Rs.30,500/-. Learned counsel for the appellant submits that the Tribunal ought to have awarded compensation towards disability. There is evidence to show that the appellant had 20 percent disability. A24 certificate was produced and the doctor was also examined as Pw3, it is contended. Learned counsel for the appellant also points out that the appellant had developed psychiatric problem. This is a case where the appellant lost MACA No.1062/2004 -2- her sister in a motor accident. The learned counsel further contends that only Rs.10,000/- is awarded towards loss of amenities and no amount is awarded towards medical expenses. He refers to the medical records. 2. There is medical evidence and also certificate to show that the appellant had suffered disability. In fact, she appears to have developed psychiatric problems also. The Tribunal has found that the evidence of Pw2 and Pw3 would show that the disability is not existing and disability assessed by the doctor is based on nature of the injuries and there is no disability affecting the earning power much less disability on the body. Therefore, we are not inclined to grant disability. But, we find that the appellant must be compensated under the head loss of amenity by awarding enhanced compensation. Appellant has difficulty to squat and walk and also to climb stairs. She also had developed psychiatric problems. We feel that we can award Rs.15,000/- more under the head loss of amenities. We feel that though it is true that no medical bills are produced there are records to show that the appellant had to go to hospital and she must MACA No.1062/2004 -3- have incurred expenses. She has produced records in respect of two hospitals namely, Medical Trust Hospital and Medical Centre. We can safely award Rs.5,000/- towards medical expenses. Accordingly, the appeal is partly allowed and the appellant is allowed to realise Rs.20,000/- more with interest at 7.5 percent form the date of the petition till realisation from the third respondent. (K.M.JOSEPH) JUDGE. (M.L.JOSEPH FRANCIS) JUDGE. MS