IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.PADMANABHAN NAIR THURSDAY, THE 28TH FEBRUARY 2008 / 9TH PHALGUNA 1929 MFA.No. 284 of 1998(B) --------------------------------- OPMV.17/1994 of MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS TRIBUNAL, ATTINGAL .................... APPELLANT - PETITIONER: ----------------------------------- G. SUBHASH, DINAMANIVILASOM VEEDU, KODUVELIKKONAM DESOM, MUTHANA P.O., VARKALA, CHIRAYINKIL TALUK. BY ADV. SRI.ELVIN PETER P.J. SRI.ELVIN PETER P.J. RESPONDENTS - RESPONDENTS: --------------------------------------------- 1. CHANTHINI GIREESH, VARAMBIL HOUSE, SREENIVASAPURAM P.O., VARKALA. 2. SUBHASH, PUTHUVALVILA VEEDU, VATTAPLAMOODU, PALACHIRA P.O., CHEMMARUTHI VILLAGE, VARKALA. 3. THE BRANCH MANAGER, UNITED INDIA INSURANCE CO. LTD., K.M. BUILDING COMPLEX NEAR MUNICIPAL BUS STAND, ATTINGAL. BY ADV. SRI.P.JACOB MATHEW THIS MISC. FIRST APPEAL HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 28/02/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: K. PADMANABHAN NAIR, J. = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = M.F.A. NO.284 OF 1998 = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = Dated this the 28th day of February, 2008 J U D G M E N T -------------------- Even as on today, notice to the first respondent could not be served. But considering the fact that the Insurer was made liable for the compensation awarded, I am of the view that notice to R1 to be dispensed with. I do so. 2. Appellant sustained injury in a motor vehicle accident which took place on 7.7.1993 at 8.30 a.m. He filed O.P(MV) No.17 of 1994 before the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Attingal claiming compensation impleading the owner, driver and Insurer of Autorikshaw bearing Reg. No.KL- 1/A-8973. Insurer alone contested the case. It was contended that there was no negligence on the part of the driver. Quantum of compensation claimed was also disputed. Tribunal found that the accident occurred due to the negligence of the driver of the Autorikshaw. It also found that the appellant was entitled to get a compensation of Rs.13,000/-. Dissatisfied with the quantum of compensation awarded, appellant M.F.A. NO.284 OF 1998 -: 2 :- himself had filed this appeal. The only question arising for consideration in this appeal is whether the appellant is entitled to get any additional compensation. 3. Appellant sustained a fracture of left clavicle. He produced a disability certificate also. Tribunal awarded only Rs.5,000/- towards continuing disability and another Rs.5,000/- for pain and suffering. Considering all aspects of the matter, I am of the view that the Tribunal ought to have awarded Rs.3,000/- more towards pain and suffering and Rs.7,000/- more for disability. So the appellant is entitled to an additional compensation of Rs.10,000/- which will carry interest at the rate of 7.5%. 4. Learned counsel appearing for the Insurer has argued that the appeal was filed as early as in 1998 and notice was ordered on 27.5.1998. But the appellant took steps only on 6.1.2005. It is also argued that even today, service is not complete. I am of the view that the Insurer cannot be saddled with the liability to pay interest for the entire period. I hold that the appellant is not entitled to get interest on the additional compensation awarded for the period from M.F.A. NO.284 OF 1998 -: 3 :- 21.1.1998 till 6.1.2005. In the result, the appeal is allowed in part. An award is passed allowing the appellant to recover an additional compensation of Rs.10,000/- with interest at the rate of 7.5% per annum from the date of petition till 21.1.1998 and thereafter from 6.1.2005 till date of deposit. Insurer is directed to deposit that amount also. On deposit, the appellant can withdraw the entire amount. K. PADMANABHAN NAIR, JUDGE. vsv K. PADMANABHAN NAIR, J. ===================== M.F.A. NO.284 OF 1998 ===================== J U D G M E N T ------------------------------------------- 28TH FEBRUARY, 2008