IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE C.N.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE V.K.MOHANAN WEDNESDAY, THE 30TH JULY, 2008 / 8TH SRAVANA, 1930 M.A.C.A.No. 194 of 2003 (B) (O.P.(MV) No.753 of 2000 on the file of the M.A.C.T., Ottappalam) APPELLANT/PETITIONER IN THE OP (MV) NO.753/00: ---------------------------------------------------------------- I.T.RADHAKRISHNAN, S/O.M.K.RAMAN NAIR, RESIDING AT 'SITHARA' THEKKUMURI (POST), KARALMANNA (VIA), CHERPLASSERY VILLAGE, OTTAPALAM TAUK, PALAKKAD DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.SANTHEEP ANKARATH RESPONDENTS/RESPONDENTS IN OP(MV) NO.753/2000: -------------------------------------------------------------------- 1. SIVADASAN S/O. NARAYANAN, RESIDING AT KOODAMTHODI HOUSE, KOTTAPPURAM POST, OTTAPALAM TALUK, PALAKKAD DISTRICT. 2. P.C.MUTHU, S/O. BALAN, RESIDING AT PARANATTU HOUSE, KOTTAPPURAM POST, OTTAPALAM TALUK PALAKKAD DISTRICT. 3. UNITED INDIA INSURANCE COMPANY LIMITED, DIVISIONAL OFFICE, ORAFA BUILDING, COURT ROAD, MANJERI, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.DEEPAK JOY.K. FOR R1 THIS MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS APPEAL HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 08/07/2008, THE COURT ON 30/07/2008 DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: C.N.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR & V.K.MOHANAN, JJ. --------------------------------------------- M.A.C.A.No. 194 of 2003 - B --------------------------------------------- Dated this the 30th day of July, 2008 J U D G M E N T Mohanan,J: Being dis-satisfied with the compensation awarded by the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Ottappalam in O.P.(MV) No.753 of 2000, the appellant/petitioner prefers this appeal. 2. The appellant/petitioner sustained injuries in a motor vehicle accident occurred on 12.7.2000 at about 9.15 am at a place called 26th Mile near Cherpulachery and connected with the said incident, crime No.121 of 2000 was registered in the Cherpulachery Police Station. The alleged incident had taken place when a Tata Sumo car bearing Registration No.KL-9 F 4644 collided against the vehicle No.KL 9F/1347 driven by him. To substantiate the claim from the side of the appellant, PW-1, the injured himself was examined and he produced Exts.A1 to A17. There was no evidence either documentary or oral from the side of the respondents. Finally, the Tribunal had MACA NO.194 OF 2003 :-2-: passed an award fixing the compensation as Rs.48,900/- which is under challenge in this appeal. 3. We have heard the counsel for the appellant and the counsel for the respondents. 4. The Tribunal, after considering the injuries sustained by the claimant, especially the fracture, nature of injuries i.e., fracture on the zygoma, on the spine frontal bone as well as the amputation of finger, had awarded a consolidated sum of Rs.20,000/- towards pain, suffering and injury. However, the documents produced with respect to the treatment, including the wound certificate and the discharge summary show the fracture of zygoma and ® frontal bone. Ext.A13 shows that it is the case of fracture of transverse process L5 and traumatic amputation of middle finger, crush injury of index finger right and ring finger of hand. 5. Considering the above factual aspects, we are of the opinion that the amount awarded towards pain, suffering and injury is inadequate and hence, we enhance MACA NO.194 OF 2003 :-3-: the same to the tune of Rs.30,000/- against Rs.20,000/-. It appears that the appellant was in the hospital for seven days, but the Tribunal fixed the hospital expenses including the bystander's expenses as Rs.1,000/- which according to us, is not correct and hence we enhance the same to the tune of Rs.2500/-. Towards loss of income during the treatment period, only a sum of Rs.8,000/- was granted. It is the case of the appellant that he is a Typist by profession. If that be so, we are of the opinion that the amount fixed under the above head is very low and we are inclined to enhance the same to the tune of Rs.10,000/-. Only a sum of Rs.5,000/- was granted towards loss of income in future as a consolidated sum. In this respect, it is relevant to note that the Doctor who examined the appellant had opined that there is complete disability to function as Typist. If that be so, we are of opinion that the compensation towards loss of income is liable to be enhanced considering the fact that due to the injury sustained by him, he may not MACA NO.194 OF 2003 :-4-: be able to do his job as a Typist which otherwise he would have been done as a Typist. In the above circumstances, we enhance the compensation awarded under the head of loss of income in future and refix the same as Rs.10,000/-. Towards the loss of amenities, we refix the compensation as Rs.6,500/- against Rs.5000/- fixed by the Tribunal and also the compensation towards extra nourishment is fixed as Rs.3500/- instead of Rs.2000/-. The transportation expense is fixed as Rs.1500/- instead of Rs.1000/- fixed by the Tribunal. Thus, we are of the opinion that the appellant is entitled to get Rs. 22,000/- (Rupees Twenty Two Thousand only) as additional compensation. 6. In the result, this appeal is allowed to the extent of enhancing the compensation to the tune of Rs.22,000/- with 7.5% interest from the date of filing the petition till the date of realisation. The third respondent is directed to deposit the additional compensation awarded by us within a period of three MACA NO.194 OF 2003 :-5-: months from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment. C.N.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR, Judge V.K.MOHANAN, Judge MBS/ MACA NO.194 OF 2003 :-6-: C.N.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR & V.K.MOHANAN, JJ. -------------------------------------------- M.A.C.A.NO. 194 OF 2003 --------------------------------------------- J U D G M E N T DATED: -7-2008 MACA NO.194 OF 2003 :-7-: