IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE J.B.KOSHY & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.P.BALACHANDRAN MONDAY, THE 13TH OCTOBER 2008 / 21ST ASWINA 1930 MACA.No.548 of 2003 (C) ------------------------------ OPMV.1547/1997 of MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS TRIBUNAL, THALASSERY .................... APPELLANT/PETITIONER ------------------------------ MINI.K. D/O.K.MUKUNDAN, AGED 21 YEARS, RESIDING AT JYOTHIS, TALAP, KANNUR. BY ADV. SRI.T.A.RAMADASAN RESPONDENTS: RESPONDENTS ------------------------------------ 1. C.H.RAMESHAN, CHELORAKANDY HOUSE, POST MUNDAYAD. 2. UNITED INDIA INSURANCE COMPANY, KANNUR. 3. KALATHILA VALAPPIL MURALEEDHARAN, S/O BALAN, KALATHIL VALAPPIL HOUSE, NARATH AMSOM, ONAPARAMBA DESOM. 4. GENERAL MANAGER, KERALA STATE ROAD TRANSPORT CORPORATION, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. ADV. SRI.M.A.GEORGE SHRI.JOHNSON P.JOHN, SC, KSRTC THIS MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS APPEAL HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 13/10/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: J. B. KOSHY & K. P. BALACHANDRAN, JJ. ------------------------------------------------ M. A. C. A. No.548 of 2003 ------------------------------------------------ Dated this the 13th day of October, 2008 JUDGMENT Koshy, J The appellant sustained injuries in a motor accident. The Tribunal found that the accident occurred due to the negligence of the driver of the vehicle owned by the fourth respondent/Corporation and directed to pay an amount of Rs.1,07,725/- with interest against a claim of Rs.3 lakhs. Only dispute is regarding the quantum of compensation. With regard to the injuries the Tribunal found as follows:- “She was initially taken to A.K.G Hospital, Kannur as per Ext.A6, O.P Ticket and she was referred to a higher institution for expert management. Ext.A7 wound certificate issued from Unity Health Complex, Mangalore, would reveal that she was having contusion right cheek, chest right side, fracture both femurs. Ext.A8 series, discharge certificate summaries, would show that she was initially treated for 31 days and thereafter re-admitted for 9 days. The entries made in the certificate would show that apart from fracture, M. A. C. A. No.548 of 2003 -2- she was having brachial plexus of the right clavicle. Ext.A9 is a N.C.V studies report, confirming the upper brachial plexus post ganglionic injury.” 2. Ext.A22 Disability Certificate issued by the Medical Board shows that she has whole body disability of 25%. PW5/Dr. K.V.Mukundan one of the members of the Medical Board was examined to prove the same. The Tribunal did not accept the above and instead of 25%, only 10% disability was assessed. She was a student at the time of accident. Therefore, only notional income (Rs.1,250/- per month or Rs.15,000/- per year as per the Second Schedule) was taken and awarded compensation of Rs.25,500/- towards disability and loss of earning power taking 10% as the permanent disability. According to the Tribunal, even though PW2 was examined, it is not stated in the certificate how the disability was assessed. It is also argued that the marriage prospects were affected. She also lost studies M. A. C. A. No.548 of 2003 -3- for one year. At the time of accident she was studying 10th standard in Kendriya Vidyalaya. Only after three years she could pass the 12th standard because of the alleged disability. Even though 25% disability was certified by the Doctor and the disability certified by the Doctor is excessive, considering the fact that she lost studies for one year, we are of the opinion that compensation ought to have been calculated for 15% disability. If that be so, she will get Rs.12,750/- more for disability, loss of earning power, loss of studies and loss of marriage prospects (Rs.1,250/- x 12 x 15/100 x 17 = Rs.38,250/-; Rs.38,250 - 25,500 = Rs.12,750/-). Even though, it is argued that compensation granted on all other heads are very low, but considering the total compensation awarded, we are not enhancing the same. The above amount of Rs.12,750/- should be deposited by the fourth respondent/Corporation with 7.5% M. A. C. A. No.548 of 2003 -4- interest from the date of application till its deposit over and above the amount decreed by the Tribunal. On deposit of the same, the appellant is allowed to withdraw the same. 3. This appeal is thus allowed in part. J. B. KOSHY JUDGE K.P.BALACHANDRAN, JUDGE kns/-