IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE A.K.BASHEER & THE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE M.C.HARI RANI THURSDAY, THE 24TH MARCH 2011 / 3RD CHAITHRA 1933 MACA.No. 2145 of 2005 ----------------------- OPMV.2/1999 of MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS TRIBUNAL, PERUMBAVOOR .................... APPELLANT: APPELLANT/PETITIONER ---------------------------------- P.A.KUTTIKRISHNAN, S/O.ACHUTHAN, PARAKKATTIL HOUSE, VALAMBOOR, PATTIMATTOM. BY ADV. SRI.WILSON URMESE RESPONDENTS: --------------- 1. SMT.ANNIES ANTONY, W/O.ANTONY JOSEPH, MUNDAMPILLY HOUSE, PAZHANGANAD, KIZHAKKAMBALAM P.O. 2. SHRI.UNNIKUTTAN, S/O.KUTTAPPAN, CHEEYADI HOUSE, SHAPPUMPADI, KIZHAKKAMBALAM P.O. 3. M/S.UNITED INDIA INSURANCE CO.LTD., CITY BRANCH OFFICE NO.II, N.H.ROAD,, KALOOR, OPPO. T.V.S., ERNAKULAM, COCHIN-682 017. ADV. SRI.P.V.JYOTHI PRASAD FOR R3 THIS MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS APPEAL HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 24/03/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: A.K. BASHEER & M.C. HARI RANI,JJ ============================== M.A.C.A. NO. 2145 OF 2005 ============================ Dated this the 24th day of March 2011 JUDGMENT Basheer, J. The short question that arises for consideration in this appeal preferred by the victim of a road traffic accident is whether the Tribunal was justified in refusing to accept the percentage of disability as certified by the Medical Board in the disability certificate. 2. The appellant contended that he had suffered serious disabilities and infirmities as a result of the accident which to a great extent, was endorsed in Ext.A9 certificate issued by the Medical Board attached to the General Hospital, Ernakulam. More importantly one of the Doctors in the Board was examined in the case as PW2. In the certificate, the Medical Board assessed the disability of the appellant as 40%. After noticing MACA 2145/2005 -2- that the appellant had been suffering from recurrent attacks of general weakness, tiredness and poor memory due to the injuries suffered by him on the temporal bone. It had also come on record that the appellant had been advised not to climb trees, which substantially ruled out the possibility of the appellant continuing with his avocation of toddy tapping. But still, the Tribunal took the view that the disability can be reckoned as only 15% and not 40% as assessed by the Tribunal. 3. Having regard to the entire facts and circumstances of the case, we are satisfied that the Tribunal was not justified in reducing the percentage of disability and that too without any valid or satisfactory reasons. Curiously, the Tribunal has not given any reasons in the award as to why the percentage had to be reduced. 4. The Tribunal had reckoned the monthly notional income of the appellant as Rs.1800/-. In our view, ends of justice will be met, if the notional income is taken as Rs.2,250/- per month. Therefore, the compensation payable under the head of disability has to be worked out as hereunder: 2250 x 12 x 40 x 15/100= 1,62,000/-. MACA 2145/2005 -3- 5. Since we have adopted the notional monthly income as Rs.2250/-, the compensation payable under the head of loss of earnings for six months shall be enhanced to Rs.13,500/-. 6. Since the Tribunal has awarded just and reasonable compensation under all other heads, we do not find any reason to modify the award any further. The appeal is disposed of as above. Sd/- A.K. BASHEER JUDGE Sd/- M.C. HARI RANI,JUDGE ks. TRUE COPY P.S. TO JUDGE MACA 2145/2005 -4-