IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE C.N.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE HARUN-UL-RASHID THURSDAY, THE 16TH OCTOBER 2008 / 24TH ASWINA 1930 MACA.No. 1453 of 2005() ----------------------- OPMV.976/2001 of MOTOR ACCIDENTS CLAIMS TRIBUNAL, MUVATTUPUZHA .................... APPELLANT(S)/PETITIONER: ----------------------------------- GOPI. K.K., S/O. KUTTAPPAN, AGED 47 YEARS, RESIDING AT KATTACHIRAYIL HOUSE KALAMPOOR KARA, ENANALLOOR VILLAGE, MUVATTUPUZHA. BY ADVS. SRI.K.JAJU BABU SMT.M.U.VIJAYALAKSHMI RESPONDENT(S)/RESPONDENTS: --------------- 1. MATHEW JOHN, THEKKEKUDIYIL HOUSE, PULINTHANAM P.O., POTHANICADU. 2. ASHARAF, S/O. SAITHU, CHENNATTU VEEDU, PULINTHANAM P.O., ENANALLOOR VILLAGE. 3. UNITED INDIA INSURANCE CO.LTD., PERUMBAVOOR BRANCH, PERUMBAVOOR. ADV. SRI.P.R.RAMACHANDRA MENON FOR R3 THIS MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS APPEAL HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 16/10/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: C.N. RAMACHANDRAN NAIR & HARUN-UL-RASHID, JJ. --------------------------------------------------------- M.A.C.A.NO. 1453 OF 2005 --------------------------------------------------------- Dated this the 16th day of October, 2008 JUDGMENT Ramachandran Nair, J. Heard counsel appearing for the appellant and Standing Counsel appearing for the Insurance Company. 2. Counsel appearing for the appellant relied on the school certificate of the appellant and submitted that since the appellant had not completed 45 years of age on the date of the accident, the multiplier should have been 15 instead of 13 adopted by the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Muvattupuzha. Counsel for the Insurance Company submitted that if the multiplier adopted by the Tribunal is altered, the multiplicant calls for reduction because toddy tapping is seasonal and the appellant cannot be expected to get steady income of Rs.5,000/- per month which was adopted by the Tribunal to fix compensation for disability. M.A.C.A. NO.1453/2005 2 3. Even though we find force in the contention of both sides, we feel that no interference with the award is called for because in absolute terms, the appellant is adequately compensated for the injury sustained by him. However, we feel that the interest awarded by the Tribunal calls for modification. Hence, there will be a direction to the Insurance Company to give interest at the rate of 7 1/2 % per annum on the total compensation from the date of application till date of payment. No other modification is called for in the award. The appeal stands allowed to the extent indicated above. (C.N. RAMACHANDRAN NAIR) JUDGE (HARUN-UL-RASHID) JUDGE sp/ M.A.C.A. NO.1453/2005 3 C.N. RAMACHANDRAN NAIR & HAURN-UL-RASHID, JJ. M.A.C.A. NO. 1453/2005 JUDGMENT 16th October, 2008 M.A.C.A. NO.1453/2005 4