IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE C.N.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE C.K.ABDUL REHIM FRIDAY, THE 12TH JUNE 2009 / 22ND JYAISHTA 1931 MACA.No. 1862 of 2007() ----------------------- OPMV.1539/2002 of MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS TRIBUNAL, MANJERI .................... APPELLANT(S): APPELLANT/PETITIONER: ----------------------------------- E. RAJA GOPALAN, S/O. SEKHARAN NAIR, EDAPPALLIL HOUSE, P.O. PADINJATTUMURI, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.P.SAMSUDIN RESPONDENT(S): 2ND AND 3RD RESPONDENTS: --------------------------------------- 1. E. ABDUL JALEEL, S/O. AVARANKUTTY, EDAVAZHIKKAL HOUSE, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT. (OWNER OF BUS NO.KL-10/K 3388). 2. UNITED INDIA INSURANCE CO. LTD., DIVISIONAL OFFICE, MANJERI. ADV. SRI.THOMAS MATHEW NELLIMOOTTIL FOR R2 THIS MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS APPEAL HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 12/06/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: C.N.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR & C.K.ABDUL REHIM, JJ. .................................................................... M.A.C.A. No.1862 of 2007 .................................................................... Dated this the 12th day of June, 2009. JUDGMENT Abdul Rehim, J. Claimant is the appellant, seeking enhancement of the quantum of compensation awarded by the Tribunal. He was working as Assistant Treasury Officer in the Government service at the time of accident. He was aged 54 years at the time of accident. The accident occurred while a Bus in which he was traveling capsized. He sustained severe injuries like fracture and dislocation of right humerus, brachial artery avulsion and some other injuries. He was treated at various hospitals like KPM Hospital, Malappuram and Ganga Hospital, Coimbatore. It is evident that even after inpatient treatment, he continued periodic review in the Hospital for about 61 times. The injuries sustained to him had resulted in continuing permanent disability which was assessed at 28%. Even though the appellant had produced salary certificate showing an income of Rs.11,487/- per month, the Tribunal adopted only a notional income of Rs.15,000/- per 2 year for calculating compensation for permanent disability, because the appellant was on the verge of his retirement, at the age of 54 years. Further, there is no evidence to show that the appellant took any continuous leave on loss of pay on account of the injury sustained or to show that he left the job before the date of superannuation. Considering the fact that, the persistent physical disability if any, will affect only the scope of future employment after retirement, we do not think that the amount assessed as compensation for permanent disability is inadequate. However, there is evidence to show that the appellant had continued inpatient and outpatient treatment for a prolonged period which would have definitely prevented him from attending office on so many days. Even though specific certificate evidencing leave was not produced, the Tribunal ought to have considered this aspect and granted reasonable amount under the head of loss of earning. So also, continuing permanent disability will deprive him from enjoyment of normal amenities and enjoyment in life. Nothing is seen granted under the head of compensation for loss of amenities and enjoyment in life. Considering these aspects, we feel 3 that the total amount of compensation awarded is on the lower side. On an anxious consideration of the evidence on record and the facts and circumstances of the case, we feel that an enhancement of the total compensation by an additional sum of Rs.25,000/- will be just and reasonable to meet the ends of justice. 2. In the result, appeal is partly allowed enhancing the total compensation by an additional sum of Rs.25,000/- which will carry interest at 7.5% p.a. from the date of application till date of payment. The second respondent-Insurance Company is directed to make payment of the amount within a period of three months. C.N.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR Judge C.K.ABDUL REHIM Judge pms