IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE A.K.BASHEER & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.Q.BARKATH ALI THURSDAY, THE 6TH JANUARY 2011 / 16TH POUSHA 1932 MACA.No. 5 of 2011(A) -------------------------------- [OP(MV).NO.784/2004 OF MOTOR ACCIDENTS CLAIMS TRIBUNAL, THALASSERY] .................... APPELLANT: ------------------- PRAFUL.S.P, S/O. LATE PRASAD, 3 YEARS, [MINOR], REP. BY MOTHER SAVITHA.C.O, 31 YEARS, SREEVALSAM.P.O, KOTTAYAMPOIL. BY ADVS. SRI.MATHEW JOHN, SRI.DOMSON J.VATTAKUZHY. RESPONDENTS: ------------------------ 1. PRADEEP KUMAR, S/O. KUNHIRAMAN NAMBIAR, MOTTALA HOUSE, P.O. KOTTAYAMPOIL, KUTHUPARAMBA - 670 691. 2. THE NEW INDIA ASSURANCE COMPANY LTD. KANNUR - 670 001. 3. KADEEJA UMMA, W/O. LATE ISMAIL, NEW HOUSE, P.O. KINYA, VIA. UCHILA, MANGALORE TALUK - 575 001. 4. K.I. MUHAMMED, S/O. LATE ISMAIL, -DO. 5. RAFEEQUE.K.I, S/O. LATE ISMAIL, -DO- -DO. 6. IQBAL.K.I, S/O. LATE ISMAIL, -DO- 7. NASEER.K.I, S/O. LATE ISMAIL, -DO- M.A.C.A. NO. 5/2011-A: 8. RIYAS.K.I, S/O. LATE ISMAIL, -DO- 9. RISWAN.K.I, S/O. LATE ISMAIL, -DO- 10. HALEEMA.K.I, S/O. LATE ISMAIL, -DO- 11. SAHEERA.K.I, D/O. LATE ISMAIL, -DO- BY THIS MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS APPEAL HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 06/01/2011,THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: A.K.BASHEER & P.Q. BARKATH ALI, JJ. =~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~==~=~=~= M.A.C.A. No. 5 of 2011 =~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~==~=~=~= Dated this the 6th day of January, 2011 JUDGMENT Barkath Ali, J. Appellant is the claimant in O.P.(MV) No. 784 of 2004 on the file of the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Thalassery. In this appeal he challenges the judgment and award of the Tribunal dated July 27, 2010 awarding a compensation of Rs.23,800/- for the loss caused to him on account of the injuries sustained by him in a motor accident. 2. The accident happened on April 17, 2001. While the claimant was travelling in a Tata Sumo bearing registration No.KA-19/N 698 along with other persons, due to the negligence of the driver of the vehicle, it skidded and dashed against a tree on the side of the road. The claimant sustained serious injuries. Alleging negligence against the 2nd respondent, driver of the offending vehicle, the claimant filed the O.P. before the Tribunal under section 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act claiming a compensation of MACA 5/2011 2 Rs.1,50,000/- 3. The 1st respondent, owner of the offending vehicle, died during the pendency of the O.P. His legal heirs were impleaded as supplemental respondents 4 to 5 by the Tribunal. The 2nd respondent driver of the offending vehicle remained absent before the Tribunal. The 3rd respondent insurer of the offending vehicle filed a written statement admitting the policy of the vehicle 4. This O.P. was jointly tried along with other O.Ps. filed by the other injured persons in the accident and a common award was passed. PW1 was examined and Exts.A1 to A37 were marked on the side of the claimant. Exts.X1 to X6 were also marked as third party Exhibits. Ext.B1 was marked on the side of the respondents. On an appreciation of the evidence, the Tribunal found that the accident occurred due to negligence of the 2nd respondent and awarded a compensation of Rs. 23,800/- with interest @ 7.5% p.a. from the date of petition till realization. The claimant has come up in appeal challenging the quantum of MACA 5/2011 3 compensation awarded by the Tribunal. 5. Heard learned counsel for the appellant/claimant. On going through the award of the Tribunal, we feel that even without issuing notice to the respondents, the 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 2nd respondent is not seriously challenged in this appeal. Therefore, the only question, which arises for consideration, is whether the claimant is entitled to any enhanced compensation. 7. The claimant sustained fracture of right tibia as revealed from Ext.A29 discharge summary issued from Thalassery Co-operative Hospital. 8. The Tribunal awarded a total compensation of Rs.23,800/-. Break up of the compensation awarded is as under:- Loss of earning : Rs. 3,000 Medical and miscellaneous : Rs. 1,600 expenses. MACA 5/2011 4 Bystander expenses : Rs. 700 Transportation : Rs. 500 Extra nourishment : Rs. 2,000 Pain and suffering : Rs. 15,000 review treatment : Rs. 1,000 ------------------ Total : Rs.23,800 ======= 9. The learned counsel for the appellant/claimant sought enhancement of compensation for the disability caused and other heads. 10. No document was produced by the claimant to show that he has suffered any disability due to the injuries sustained. In Ext.X6 certificate the Medical Board has certified that claimant suffered no disability. Therefore, the Tribunal is perfectly justified in not awarding any compensation for the alleged disability caused by the claimant. Taking into consideration the nature of the injuries sustained by the claimant and period of treatment he had undergone, we are of the view that the compensation awarded by the Tribunal is just and reasonable. That being so, the claimant is not entitled to MACA 5/2011 5 any enhanced compensation. It follows that the appeal has to be dismissed. In the result, the appeal is dismissed. No costs. A.K.BASHEER, JUDGE. P.Q. BARKATH ALI, JUDGE. mn