IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE A.K.BASHEER & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.Q.BARKATH ALI TUESDAY, THE 7TH DECEMBER 2010 / 16TH AGRAHAYANA 1932 MACA.No. 2376 of 2010() ----------------------- OPMV.3065/2003 of MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS TRIBUNAL, THRISSUR .................... APPELLANT(S): PETITIONER ------------------------ A.J.POULOSE, S/O. A.P.JOSEPH, ATTUPURATH HOUSE, MELECHIRA.P.O., CHUVANNAMANNU, THRISSUR DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.P.V.CHANDRA MOHAN RESPONDENTS/RESPONDENTS --------------- 1. JOBY GEORGE, S/O. GEORGE, POOKKOTTU HOUSE, KANNARA.P.O., THRISSUR DISTRICT-679556. 2. BAIJU VARGHESE @ BIJU, S/O.VARGHESE, AATTINKUZHI HOUSE, PUNNACHERY, KANNARA.P.O., THRISSUR DISTRICT-679556. 3. NATIONAL INSURANCE CO. LTD., DIVISIONAL OFFICE, KOLLANNUR DEVASSY SMARAK BUILDING, ROUND NORTH,THRISSUR. THIS MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS APPEAL HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 07/12/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: A.K.BASHEER & P.Q.BARKATH ALI, JJ. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - M.A.C.A.No.2376 OF 2010 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Dated this the 7th day of December, 2010 JUDGMENT Barkath Ali, J. Appellant is the claimant in O.P.(MV)No.3065/2003 on the file of Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Thrissur. In this appeal he challenges the judgment and award of the Tribunal dated July 20, 2010 awarding a compensation of Rs.1,49,000/- for the loss caused to him on account of the injuries sustained by him in a motor accident. He sustained the following injuries in that accident that occurred on March 20, 2003 at about 3.45.p.m.: Oblique fracture of shaft of femur M/3rd and L/3rd junction, incised wound 5 x 3 cm. over left knee, incised wound 4 cm. long over left foot, lacerated wound 6 cm. long on forehead. 2. The accident happened while the claimant was travelling in a car bearing Reg.No.KL-3/F 4269 along Thiruvananthapuram- Ernakulam National Highway, the car dashed against the tempo van bearing Reg.No.KL-01/C 925 driven by second respondent. Alleging negligence against the second respondent, the claimant filed the O.P. before the Tribunal under Section 166 of Motor Vehicles Act claiming MACA.No.2376/2010 2 a compensation of Rs. 2,86,000/-. 3. Respondents 1 and 2, the owner and the driver of the offending tempo van remained absent before the Tribunal. The third respondent, the insurer of the offending tempo van filed a written statement admitting the policy. 4. This O.P. was jointly tried along with other O.Ps. filed by the co-passengers in the car. Exts.A1 to A20 were marked on the side of the claimant before the Tribunal. Ext.B1 was marked on the side of the contesting third respondent. The Tribunal on an appreciation of evidence found that the accident occurred due to the rash and negligent driving of the offending tempo van by second respondent and awarded a compensation of Rs. 1,49,000/- with interest @ 8% per annum from the date of petition till realisation and proportionate cost. The claimant has now come up in appeal challenging the quantum of compensation awarded by the Tribunal. 5. Heard the counsel for the appellant/claimant. On going through the award of the Tribunal, we felt that even without notice to the respondents, this appeal can be disposed of. 6. The accident is not disputed. The finding of the Tribunal that the accident occurred due to the negligence on the part of the MACA.No.2376/2010 3 second respondent is not challenged in this appeal. Therefore, the only question which arises for consideration is whether the claimant is entitled to any enhanced compensation. 7. The break up of the compensation awarded by the Tribunal is as under : Loss of earning - Rs. 12,500/- Transportation - Rs. 1,000/- Extra nourishment - Rs. 2,000/- Damage to clothing - Rs. 500/- Treatment exp. - Rs. 67,700/- Bystander exp. - Rs. 4,000/- Pain and suffering - Rs. 30,000/- Disability - Rs. 31,200/- 8. Taking into consideration the nature of the injuries sustained by the claimant and the period of treatment he has undergone, we feel that the compensation awarded by the Tribunal is just and reasonable. It follows that the claimant is not entitled to any enhanced compensation. In the result, the appeal is dismissed. A.K.BASHEER, JUDGE P.Q.BARKATH ALI, JUDGE sv. MACA.No.2376/2010 4 MACA.No.2376/2010 5