IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.R.RAMAN & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.R.RAMACHANDRA MENON FRIDAY, THE 4TH DECEMBER 2009 / 13TH AGRAHAYANA 1931 MACA.No. 203 of 2006 ---------------------- ( OPMV.3477/2000 of MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS TRIBUNAL, THRISSUR) APPELLANT/PETITIONER: ----------------------------------- THAMI, S/O. KOLAVAN, KALLUVETTUKUZHIYIL HOUSE, P.O. AKKIKKAVU, VIA. PERUMBILAVU, THRISSUR DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.P.V.CHANDRA MOHAN RESPONDENTS/RESPONDENTS 1 TO 3: ---------------------------------------- 1. K. MOIDU, S/O. KUNJALANKUTTY, KARIYARA HOUSE, P.O. MATTATHOOR, THRISSUR DISTRICT 2. MOIDUNNI, S/O. ABDU, MANAMKANDATH HOUSE, P.O. KALLUPURAM,THRISSUR DIST. 3. THE NEW INDIA ASSURANCE COMPANY, BRANCH OFFICE, KUNNAMKULAM, THRISSUR. (4TH RESPONDENT IN THE CLAIM PETITION IS NOT MADE A PARTY HERE, SINCE NO RELIEF IS CLAIMED AGAINST HIM). R3 BY ADV. SRI.V.P.K.PANICKER. THIS MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS APPEAL HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 04/12/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: P.R. RAMAN & P.R. RAMACHANDRA MENON, JJ. ................................................................................ M.A.C.A. No. 203 OF 2006 ......................................................................... Dated this the 4th December , 2009 J U D G M E N T P.R. Raman, J: Appellant, a manual labourer, while walking through the road was knocked down by an autorickshaw driven by the first respondent causing serious injuries. The accident occurred on 19.03.2000. He was treated in different hospitals for different spells. He produced Exts. A10 (X-ray) and as well as A11 the certificate of disability to prove the nature of the injuries suffered by him. The Tribunal found that the accident was because of the negligence on the part of the auto driver. Compensation was worked out under different heads and a total sum of Rs.65,100/- along with interest at the rate of 7% per annum was awarded. Dissatisfied with the compensation awarded, this appeal has been filed. 2. It was firstly contended by the learned Counsel for the appellant that though Ext. A11 certificate issued by the Doctor shows that the appellant had 22% permananet disability, on the sole reason that the doctor was not examined, the Tribunal did M.A.C.A. No. 203 OF 2006 2 not grant any compensation towards 'permanent disability'. It is true that Ext.A11 is not proved by examining the doctor. But then the fact remains that he has suffered several injuries as evidenced by Ext. A11 and he has also undergone treatment in different hospitals at different periods for a total period of 66 days. Considering the nature of the injuries sustained by him including comminuted fracture of both legs and other corresponding injuries, we find it necessary that some amount of compensation towards 'disability' ought to have been granted. Since the doctor was not examined, we cannot accept the percentage as certified in Ext.A11. However, the disability is estimated at 15%. Taking '5' as the multiplier and income as Rs.2000/- (he being above 63 years) as fixed by the Court below, the compensation is worked out. Thus he will be entitled for an amount of Rs. 18000/- (Rupees eighteen thousand only). 3. For loss of income, he has been awarded a sum of Rs. 8000/- taking four months as the period, during which he would have remained without work. Considering the nature of the injuries, we find that he would have remained without work for M.A.C.A. No. 203 OF 2006 3 a period of 6 months. Accordingly he is entitled for a further sum of Rs.4000/- (Rupees four thousand only) towards 'loss of earning'. 4. Towards 'pain and suffering' an amount of Rs. 10000/- has already been awarded. A further sum of Rs.3000/- is awarded under this head. Thus he is entitled for a balance sum of Rs.25,000/- (Rupees twenty five thousand only) by way of additional compensation. This amount of additional compensation will also carry 7% interest from the date of the petition till its realisation. The said amount will be deposited by the Insurance Company within two months from the date of receipt of copy of the judgment . Appeal is allowed, as above. P.R. RAMAN, JUDGE. P.R. RAMACHANDRA MENON, JUDGE. lk