IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE M.N.KRISHNAN THURSDAY, THE 19TH JUNE 2008 / 29TH JYAISHTA 1930 MACA.No. 1992 of 2005() ----------------------- OPMV.439/2001 of MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS TRIBUNAL, MANJERI .................... APPELLANT/PETITIONER: -------------------------------------- M.I. VARGHESE, AGED 45 YEARS, MILK VENDOR, S/O. BABY, MOOLAMOOTTIL HOUSE, P.O. NILAMBUR, NILAMBUR TALUK, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.DEVIDAS.U.K RESPONDENTS/RESPONDENTS: ------------- 1. K. MOOSA, S/O. MARAKKAR, KOORIMANNIL HOUSE, CHATHANGOTTUPURAM P.O., WANDOOR, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT (DRIVER). 2. A.K. VELAYUDHAN, S/O. A.K. VELU, ARIMBRA HOUSE, KARAD P.O., WANDOOR, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT. (OWNER). 3. UNITED INDIA INSURANCE CO.LTD., ARAFA BUILDINGS, MANJERI P.O., MALAPPURAM DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.THOMAS MATHEW NELLIMOOTTIL FOR R3 THIS MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS APPEAL HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 19/06/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: M.N.KRISHNAN, J. -------------------------- M.A.C.A. No. 1992 OF 2005 --------------------- Dated this the 19th day of June, 2008 JUDGMENT This appeal is preferred against the award passed by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Manjeri, in OP(MV) 439/01. The claimant, a milk vendor by profession aged 40 years, sustained injuries in a road accident whereby he suffered a crush injury on the right foot which resulted in the amputation of the right little toe. He has a compound fracture of the third meta carpel. The medical board assessed his disability at 3%. The Tribunal fixed his income at Rs.15,000/- per annum and awarded him a compensation of Rs.21,308. It is against that decision, the present appeal is preferred by the claimant. 2. Heard the counsel for both sides. Learned counsel for the appellant would contend that the Tribunal has erred in awarding inadequate amount as compensation. It can be seen that he was treated as an inpatient in the hospital for 32 days and certainly he would not have been in a position to do the work for a period of three months. I grant him an amount of Rs.4,500/- towards loss of earning MACA No.1992/05 2 i.e. Rs.1,500x3. For the long period of hospitalisation with crush injury and amputation of toe, there will be pain and suffering and the amount awarded under pain and suffering is only Rs.8,000/-which also is enhanced to Rs.10,000/-, i.e. an enhancement of Rs.2,000/-. When the disability compensation is calculated at the rate of Rs.18,000/- as income per annum, the difference will come to Rs.1,440/- which also the claimant is entitled to get. It has to be borne in mind that the Tribunal has not awarded any compensation for loss of amenities in the case where there has been amputation of the toe, a serious fracture on the meta tarcel and also a crush injury. I award Rs.4,000/- under that head. 3. Learned counsel submits before me that it was on account of a hit by a bus the cycle was damaged and no compensation is awarded. It is true that no bills are produced. But the facts remains that on account of the accident the central frame of the cycle has been broken which shows that it was a serious damage. In the absence of any materials, I award Rs.1,000/- as damage to the cycle as well as milk that is loss in the accident. Therefore, the additional compensation would come to Rs.12,940/-, which I round as Rs.13,000/-. MACA No.1992/05 3 In the result, the MACA is partly allowed and the claimant is awarded an additional compensation of Rs.13,000/- with 7% interest on the said sum from the date of petition till realisation. The Insurance Company is directed to deposit the amount within 60 days from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment. M.N.KRISHNAN, JUDGE vps MACA No.1992/05 4 MACA No.1992/05 5