IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE A.K.BASHEER & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.Q.BARKATH ALI THURSDAY, THE 10TH FEBRUARY 2011 / 21ST MAGHA 1932 MACA.No. 422 of 2005() ---------------------- OPMV.533/1996 of MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS TRIBUNAL, IRINJALAKUDA .................... APPELLANT/PETITIONER ----------------------- VINAYAN S/O. KUMARAN, AMBADAN HOUSE, ALOOR, VIA. KALLETTUMKARA, THRISSUR. BY ADV. SRI.K.A.SREEJITH RESPONDENTS/RESPONDENTS : --------------- 1. THE SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE, THRISSUR. 2. SUKUMARAN S/O. VELAYUDHAN, CHUNKATH HOUSE, ERAYANKUDI, MAMBRA. 3. UNITED INDIA INSURANCE CO.LTD., BRANCH OFFICE, VADAKKANCHERRY, THRISSUR. THIS MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS APPEAL HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 10/02/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: A.K.BASHEER & P.Q.BARKATH ALI, JJ. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - M.A.C.A.No.422 OF 2005 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Dated this the 10th day of February, 2011 JUDGMENT Barkath Ali, J. Appellant is the claimant in O.P.(MV)No.533/1996 on the file of Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Irinjalakuda. In this appeal he challenges the judgment and award of the Tribunal dated February 27,2003 awarding a compensation of Rs.16,000/- for the loss caused to him on account of the injuries sustained by him in a motor accident. He sustained the following injuries in that accident : 1. Lacerated wound 2 x ½ cm. left side of cheek. 2. Punctured wound over left leg. 3. Fracture shaft of left femur. 4. Contusion right shoulder. 5. Central incisor tooth broken. 2. The accident occurred on November 10, 1995 at about 1 a.m.. While the claimant was travelling in the police jeep bearing Reg.No.KER 8542 from Aloor to Thrissur Railway station along Ernakulam -Thrissur National Highway 47 and when he reached at Pallikkara, due to the negligence of the driver of the jeep, the second MACA.No.422/05 2 respondent, the jeep capsized. Alleging negligence against the second respondent, the claimant filed the O.P. before the Tribunal under Section 166 of Motor Vehicles Act claiming a compensation of Rs. 1,62,700/-. 3. Respondents 1 and 2, the owner and the driver of the offending jeep filed a written statement admitting the accident, but denied the liability. The third respondent, the insurer of the offending jeep filed a written statement admitting the policy. 4. This O.P. was jointly tried along with the other injured passengers in the jeep and a common award was passed by the Tribunal. Exts.A1 to A3 and Ext.X1 were marked on the side of the claimant before the Tribunal. Ext.B1 was marked by the contesting third respondent. The Tribunal on an appreciation of evidence found that the accident occurred due to the rash and negligent driving of the offending jeep by second respondent and awarded a compensation of Rs. 16,000/- with interest @ 9% per annum from the date of petition till realisation. The claimant has now come up in appeal challenging the quantum of compensation awarded by the Tribunal. MACA.No.422/05 3 5. Heard the counsel for the appellant/claimant and the counsel for the Insurance Company. 6. The accident is not disputed. The finding of the Tribunal that the accident occurred due to the negligence on the part of the second respondent is not challenged in this appeal. Therefore, the only question which arises for consideration is whether the claimant is entitled to any enhanced compensation. 7. The Tribunal awarded a total compensation of Rs.16,000/-. The break up of the compensation amount awarded is as under: Loss of earnings - Rs.4,500/- Transportation - Rs. 500/- Pain and suffering - Rs.7,000/- Loss of amenities - Rs.4,000/- 8. The claimant was aged 30 and is a watch repairer . He did not produce any document to show the details of treatment he has undergone or to show that he has suffered any disability due to the injuries sustained. Under these circumstances and taking into consideration the nature of the injuries sustained by the claimant and the period of treatment he has undergone, we feel that the compensation awarded by the Tribunal is just and reasonable. It MACA.No.422/05 4 follows that the claimant is not entitled to any enhanced compensation In the result, the appeal fails and the same is hereby dismissed. A.K.BASHEER, JUDGE P.Q.BARKATH ALI, JUDGE sv. MACA.No.422/05 5