IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE M.N.KRISHNAN THURSDAY, THE 24TH JULY 2008 / 2ND SRAVANA 1930 MFA.No. 265 of 1998(B) ---------------------- OPMV.307/1991 of MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS TRIBUNAL, TRIVANDRUM .................... APPELLANT: CLAIMANT: ------------------------------------- SURENDRAN, S/O.V.R.NARAYANAN EZHUTHACHAN, 'THARA' KANNAMMOOLA, MEDICAL COLLEGE P.O., THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. BY ADV. SRI.KMV.PANDALAI RESPONDENTS: RESPONDENTS: --------------------------------------------------- 1. B.AJITH KUMAR, SARASWATHY VILASOM, T.C.49/1666, MANACAUD, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 2. KRISHNAN THAMPY, S/O.HARIHARAPUTHRAN THAMPY, KAMALALAYAM, EDAPAZHINJI, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 3. THE GENERAL MANAGER, ORIENTAL INSURANCE COMPANY LTD., ARISTO JUNCTION, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. BY ADV. SRI.S.JAMES VINCENT - R2 SRI.P.V.JYOTHI PRASAD - R3 THIS MISC. FIRST APPEAL HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 24/07/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: Kss M.N. KRISHNAN, J. = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = M.F.A.NO. 265 OF 1998 = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = Dated this the 24th day of July, 2008. J U D G M E N T This appeal is preferred against the award of the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Thiruvananthapuram in OP(MV) 307/91. The claimant aged 40 years at the time of the accident sustained injuries and he had undergone treatment on many occasions in the Medical College Hospital. A perusal of the certificate of disability issued by the Medical College Hospital and marked as Exts.A11 and not accepted by the Tribunal would indicate the injuries sustained by the claimant. (1) He had a badly lacerated wound of 4 inches x 3 inches on the ankle (2) A lacerated wound on the foot (3) Skin loss on the medial mallelous (4) Comminuted supramalleolar fracture left fibula with comminution. (5) Dislocation of left ankle joint (compound fracture) and another comminuted fracture on the medial mallelous. MFA 265 of 1998 -2- 2. The details given would show that he had undergone treatment for a considerable length of time. The Doctor certified that there is a total disability for three years, temporary disability for further one year and permanent partial disability at 16%. According to the Doctor there was deformity to the left foot. There has been periodic tenosynovitis of left leg, gross wasting of calf muscles and traumatic partial ankylosis of joints. It is true that the Doctor was not examined and the Tribunal did not accept the certificate at all. I am relying on the certificate for the purpose of understanding the injuries sustained by the person and to fix the compensation. The Tribunal has also considered the documents but ultimately came to a conclusion that a global compensation of Rs.12,000/- will suffice. It is incorrect and justice had not been done to the claimant. Therefore I recalculate the compensation as follows. 3. Though the disability certificate is not to be accepted in toto the fact remains that he had comminuted fracture of the mallelous with fracture on the left fibula. He MFA 265 of 1998 -3- had also developed drug reaction and therefore had to undergo a very prolonged treatment. So a minimum of six months loss of earnings at least have to be granted. Being a contractor I fix his income at Rs.2,000/- and award Rs.12,000/- towards actual loss of earnings. Towards treatment expenses, bystander's expenses, transport expenses etc. it is seen that there had been much complication and he was visiting hospitals almost continuously for a prolonged time. Certainly he would have used transport vehicle and there would have been somebody with him and he would have also purchased some medicine. So considering the factum of the prolonged treatment I award Rs.5,000/- under that head. A fracture coupled with the drug reaction and development of further complication would have made the claimant suffer excruciating pain. For which I award him a sum of Rs.10,000/-. Though the disability certificate need not be accepted as such the factum remains that the fibula fracture coupled with the mallelous fracture and dislocation of the ankle would have caused him certainly some disability which MFA 265 of 1998 -4- can be compensated at least on a minimum of 5%. If the annual income is taken as Rs.24,000/- and an appropriate multiplier of 16 is used then the permanent disability compensation would come to Rs.19,200/-. At least some amount has to be granted to him for loss of amenities and enjoyment in life. For which I award Rs.3,000/-. Thus the total compensation would come to Rs.49,200/- out of which Rs.12,000/- has been already awarded. Or in other words, the claimant is entitled to an additional compensation of Rs.37,200/-. In the result the MACA is partly allowed and the claimant is awarded an additional compensation of Rs.37,200/- with 6% 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/- MFA 265 of 1998 -5- M.N. KRISHNAN, J. = = = = = = = = = = M.F.A. No. 265 OF 1998 = = = = = = = = = = = J U D G M E N T 24th July, 2008.