IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE M.N.KRISHNAN MONDAY, THE 7TH JULY 2008 / 16TH ASHADHA 1930 MACA.No. 663 of 2004() -------------------------------- OPMV.347/1998 of MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS TRIBUNAL, THALASSERY .................... APPELLANT/PETITIONER ------------------------------------- C.P.RAJEEVAN, S/O. NARAYANAN, AGED 30 YEARS, ORAPPADI, KAYARALAM, P.O.MAYYIL. BY ADV. SRI.V.RAMKUMAR NAMBIAR RESPONDENTS/ RESPONDENT ------------------------------------------- 1. RAJEEVAN E.M. S/O. KUNHIRAMAN, EDAVAN MANIYATH, P.O.CHERUPAZHASSI. 2. M.PRADEEPAN S/O. ACHUTHAN, MANNAM HOUSE, P.O.ANDERR, PARASSINIKKADAVU. 3. THE BRANCH MANAGER, UNITED INDIA INSURANCE CO.LTD., PAYYANNUR. BY ADV. SMT.K.K.CHANDRALEKHA - R2 SRI.SUDHEESH THAROL - R2 SRI.RAJAN P.KALIYATH - R3 THIS MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS APPEAL HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 07/07/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: M.N.KRISHNAN, J ===================== MACA No.663 OF 2004 ===================== Dated this the 7th day of July 2008 JUDGMENT This appeal is preferred against the award of the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Thalassery in O.P.(MV)No.347 of 1998. The claimant a toddy tapper by profession sustained fracture of his leg and the Tribunal awarded him a compensation of Rs.72,900/- which takes in about Rs.30,000/- as medical expenses. Dissatisfied with the award, the claimant has come up in appeal. 2. Heard the counsel for the appellant as well as the counsel for the insurance company. Perused the records made available. It can be seen that the claimant sustained fracture of the leg as a result of which he was initially treated in the Unity Health Complex, Mangalore for 22 days. Thereafter internal fixation was removed for which purpose he remained in the hospital for 3 days. The 3rd discharge card would reveal that bone grafting was done on 8.9.1997 and he was discharged on 21.9.1997. The Tribunal fixed his income at Rs.1500/- and negatived the disability certificate issued on the MACA 663/2004 -:2:- ground that it is not issued by the Doctor, who has treated him and thereafter proceeded to work out the compensation. So far as the profession of a toddy tapper is concerned, it is not correct to fix his income at Rs.1,500/- for the reason that his income is much more than that. It can be seen that he had produced a document to show that his income is about Rs.7,000/-. It is a certificate issued by the General Secretary of the trade union range. I think without any hesitation, the court can fix the income at Rs.2,500/-. The main complaint of the Tribunal was that the disability certificate had been issued by the Doctor, who has not treated him. The learned counsel had produced before me the discharge summary card which indicates the name of Umanandamalliya. There is also signature either by Umanandamalliya or on behalf of him by the hospital authorities. This is a case where a patient had to undergo treatment for 38 days as an inpatient on account of the injury sustained and on account of the malunion fracture bone grafting has to be done. The copy of the disability certificate would show that there has been shortening of the leg by 2 cms and for the purpose of grafting, bone from the iliac crest has been removed. The disability certificate explains the total treatment that he has undergone which is clearly evident from the discharge card itself and therefore it is not correct to reject the disability certificate in toto to disallow compensation to the MACA 663/2004 -:3:- claimant. It has to be further remembered that a toddy tapper by profession who requires a very healthy leg had been badly fractured which resulted in shortening of the leg coupled with the limitation of movements and therefore some disability has to be taken up, taking into consideration the factum of his job as a climber. I feel at least 8% disability can be taken as the lowest and on that basis the compensation can be calculated. When it is taken as 8% and the monthly income at Rs.2,500/- the annual loss of earning capacity will come to Rs.2,400/- which when multiplied by 18 would be Rs.43,200/-. Out of this amount, Rs.8,000/- has been awarded towards loss of amenities and enjoyment in life which can be deducted since percentage disability compensation is being awarded. Therefore the claimant will be entitled to an additional compensation for disability at Rs.35,200/-. Since it is seen that he had not been able to do any work for a period of six months then the difference in compensation at the rate of Rs.2,500/- would come to Rs.6,000/- makes the additional compensation of Rs.41.200/-. Therefore the MACA is partly allowed and the claimant is entitled to an additional compensation of Rs.41,200/- with 7% interest on the said sum from the date of petition till realisation and the insurance company is directed to deposit the amount within 60 days from the date of receipt of a MACA 663/2004 -:4:- copy of this judgment. M.N.KRISHNAN, JUDGE Cdp/-