IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE M.N.KRISHNAN MONDAY, THE 1ST DECEMBER 2008 / 10TH AGRAHAYANA 1930 MACA.No. 2022 of 2007() ----------------------------------- OPMV.929/2003 of MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS TRIBUNAL, PALA .................... APPELLANT(S): /PETITIONER ------------------------- FRANCIS,S/O.THOMAS VANCHINTHANATHU HOUSE, KURICHITHANAM P.O. & VILLAGE POOVATHINKAL KARA. BY ADV. SRI.ABRAHAM MATHEW (VETTOOR) RESPONDENT(S): RESPONDENTS -------------------------- 1. SHEENA LUKOS S/O. LUKA, ALPARAYIL HOUSE, KAIMALILTHATTIL BHAGOM KARINECHI KARA, UZHAVOOR VILLAGE. 2. K.SURESH,S/O.KARUNAKARAN, PARACHALIL HOUSE MONIPPALLY P.O. VILLAGE & KARA, KOTTAYAM DISTRICT. 3. THE NATIONAL INSURANCE CO.LTD REPRESENTED BY ITS BRANCH MANAGER, THRIPUNITHURA BRANCH. ADV. SRI.JOE KALLIATH FOR R3 THIS MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS APPEAL HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 01/12/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: M.N.KRISHNAN, J ===================== MACA No.2022 OF 2007 ===================== Dated this the 1st day of December 2008 JUDGMENT This appeal is preferred against the award of the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Pala in O.P.(MV)No.929 of 2003. The claimant, while riding a motor bike sustained injuries on account of a collision with a bus. The Tribunal found that the driver of the bus was negligent and awarded him a compensation of Rs.11,330/-. It is against that decision, the claimant has come up in appeal for enhancement. 2. Heard the counsel for the appellant as well as the counsel for the insurance company. Learned counsel for the appellant would submit before me that the Tribunal has not taken the income properly and has also not taken into consideration the disability caused to the claimant and therefore prays for interference. It is submitted by him that he was a driver by profession. It can be seen that he was driving a motor bike at the time of accident and being a driver by profession, his income is fixed at Rs.2,500/- especially under the circumstances that the accident had taken place in the year 2003. The documents produced would show that he had a dislocation MACA 2022/2007 -:2:- of the left shoulder and one of the documents would reveal that he had a total temporary disability for one month and partial disability for 3 months. Considering the fact that there was dislocation of the left shoulder and visiting the hospital on so many occasions, I feel this is a fit case to award two months' loss of earning and when it is so, the claimant is entitled to Rs.3,000/- more under that head. The Tribunal has observed that the disability is not proved by examining the Doctor. Whatever it is, a person who is a driver by profession had sustained dislocation of shoulder which will affect his day-to-day activities and there would have been temporary disability at least for some point of time. Taking into consideration that aspect, I award him a sum of Rs.5,000/- under that head. Therefore the claimant will be entitled to an additional compensation of Rs.8,000/-. In the result, the MACA is partly allowed and the claimant is entitled to an additional compensation of Rs.8,000/- with 7.5% 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 copy of this judgment. M.N.KRISHNAN, JUDGE Cdp/- MACA 2022/2007 -:3:-