IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE A.K.BASHEER & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.Q.BARKATH ALI MONDAY, THE 12TH JULY 2010 / 21ST ASHADHA 1932 MACA.No. 1503 of 2009() ----------------------- OPMV.549/2000 of MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS TRIBUNAL, PALAKKAD .................... APPELLANT(S): CLAIMANT ---------------------- MOHANAN, S/O. VELAYUDHAN, AMBATTUPARAMBU HOUSE, THONAIPPADAM, ALATHUR, PALAKKAD. REP. BY THE POWER HOLDER BABU, S/O. VELAYUDHAN, DO-DO- BY ADV. SRI.LIJU. M.P RESPONDENT(S): RESPONDENTS --------------- 1. H.N.BADRA REDDY, S/O. NARAYANA REDDY, HARDENAHALLI, SARIJAPURA.P.O. ANEKAL TALUK, BANGALORE DIST. PIN-562125. (OWNER AND DRIVER OF THE TANKER LORRY) 2. THE UNITED INDIA INSURANCE CO. LTD., DIVISIONAL OFFICE.B. 143/144, 1ST FLOOR, C.K.N CHAMBERS, MAIN ROAD, SESHADRIPURAM BANGALORE-20. ADV. SMT.T.C.SOWMIAVATHY FOR R2 P.JAYASANKAR FOR R2 SRI.P.JAYASANKAR FOR R2 THIS MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS APPEAL HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 12/07/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: A.K.BASHEER & P.Q.BARKATH ALI, JJ. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - M.A.C.A. No.1503 OF 2009 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Dated this the 12th day of July, 2010 JUDGMENT Basheer, J. The only point urged by learned counsel for the appellant before us is whether the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal was justified in disallowing any compensation for the injury sustained by the appellant on his genital organ. 2. The Tribunal after considering the oral and documentary evidence adduced by the appellant awarded a total sum of Rs. 83,500/- with 6% interest from the date of petition till the date of realisation. Of course, the Tribunal awarded a sum of Rs. 25,000/- for loss of amenities and enjoyment of his normal marital life apart from a sum of Rs. 15,000/- for pain and suffering and Rs.26,541/- towards medical expenses. 3. The appellant had got himself examined as PW1 and deposed about the nature of the injuries sustained by him particularly to his genital organ. Ext.A3, wound certificate will reveal that the MACA.No.1503/2009 2 major injury sustained by the appellant was on his hip region. 4. Ext.A4, the certificate issued by Dr.Darwin D.Therattil, a Consultant Urologist, will reveal that the appellant had been put on intermittent urethral catheterisation and was left with a urethral disorder which could not be effectively cured by treatment. The accident had occurred in the year 1999. Ext.A4 certificate was issued by the doctor in May 2001, the relevant portion of which is extracted hereunder : “ He has undergone four major surgical interventions for the same. He is on intermittent urethral catheterisation and is left with a urethral disorder which cannot be effectively cured by treatment. He has no sexual function for the penis after the accident due to injury to blood vessels concerned with penile erection. He has got a total permanent disability of 40%( forty percent).” 5. The doctor who issued Ext.A3 was examined as PW2. He stated that the disorder of the appellant cannot be cured. But still, the MACA.No.1503/2009 3 Tribunal took the view that the disability certified by the doctor as 40% cannot be accepted. According to the Tribunal, the disability can be only loss of amenities and enjoyment of his normal marital life and therefore appellant would not be entitled to get compensation for the alleged disability. But still, the Tribunal awarded a sum of Rs. 25,000/- for loss of amenities and enjoyment of his normal marital life. We are unable to comprehend rationale of the above view taken by learned Judge, to say the least. 6. Having regard to the medical evidence adduced by the appellant before the Tribunal and having perused Exts.A3 and A4 certificates, we have no hesitation to hold that the appellant is entitled to get reasonable compensation for the injury sustained by him on his genital organ and the resultant disability caused to him because of that injury in addition to the compensation awarded under the other heads. 7. It is on record that the appellant was working as a Motor Mechanic. He was aged 22 at the time of the accident. According to him, he was earning a monthly income of Rs. 4,500/-. But the Tribunal has assessed his monthly income as Rs. 1500/-. In the facts MACA.No.1503/2009 4 and circumstances of the case, we are of the view that the monthly income of the appellant can be reckoned as Rs. 2,500/-. The compensation payable to the appellant for the disability suffered by him can be calculated thus: 2500 x 12 x 17 x 25/100 = Rs. 1,27,500/- 8. We are not disturbing the amount granted by the Tribunal to the appellant under the head of loss of amenities and enjoyment of life. The appellant shall be entitled to get interest on the entire amount of compensation at the rate of 7.5%. However, he shall not be eligible to get interest for the period of delay of 775 days with which the appeal was filed. The Appeal is disposed of in the above terms. A.K.BASHEER, JUDGE P.Q.BARKATH ALI, JUDGE sv. MACA.No.1503/2009 5 MACA.No.1503/2009 6