IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.M.JOSEPH & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE M.L.JOSEPH FRANCIS FRIDAY, THE 19TH JUNE 2009 / 29TH JYAISHTA 1931 MACA.No. 1214 of 2005 B ----------------------------- OPMV.1572/1998 of MOTOR ACCIDENTS CLAIMS TRIBUNAL, PALAKKAD .................... APPELLANT(S): PETITIONER: ------------------------------------------ SUDHEESH, S/O.NARAYANAN, AGED 27 YEARS, PULIYAKOTTU VEEDU, VADAKKETHARA, PUDUSSEY P.O., PALAKKAD. BY ADV. SRI.BINOY VASUDEVAN RESPONDENT(S): RESPONDENTS: ------------------------------------------------- 1. T.A.VARGHEESE, S/O.AUGUSTIN, AGED 46 YEARS, THETTIYIL HOUSE, ANGAMALY, ALWAYE(DRIVER CUM OWNER OF CAR KEF 2000). 2. M/S.THE NEW INDIA ASSURANCE CO LTD., SHOPPING CENTRE, ALWAYE ROAD, ANGAMALI. ADV. SRI.N.S.MOHAMMED USMAN FOR R2 THIS MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS APPEAL HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 19/06/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: K. M. JOSEPH & M. L. JOSEPH FRANCIS, JJ. -------------------------------------------------- M.A.C.A.NO. 1214 OF 2005 B --------------------------------------------------- Dated this the 19th June, 2009 JUDGMENT Joseph, J. Appellant is the claimant in a petition filed under Sections 163 and 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act. He has been awarded a total sum of Rs.53,750/=. 2. We heard the learned counsel for the appellant and the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the second respondent Insurance Company. 3. Learned counsel for the appellant would raise two contentions before us. Firstly, he would contend that the Doctor has certified vide Ext.A10 that the appellant has 15 per cent disability. But, in calculating the compensation for disability, only 7 per cent was taken. He would further submit that the appellant was a mason. The income taken is only Rs.1,500/= per month. Learned counsel for the second respondent supports the MACA.1214/05B 2 Award. 4. As far as the contention against income is concerned, the claim of the appellant was that he was a mason. The accident took place in the year 1998. It may be true that there may be no evidence as such, but having regard to the accident and the vocation of the appellant, we fix the income is Rs.2,000/= per month. This means that the appellant would get a sum of Rs.3,000/= more towards loss of earning. Further, we notice that this is a case where the Doctor who issued the Certificate was examined. Having regard to the nature of the injuries suffered which include Premaxillary fracture, Alveolar fracture left, Fracture shaft of right femur, Grade I fracture right tibia, besides of course, large number of lacerated injuries, and also the vocation of the appellant, we feel that the per centage can be fixed at 9. On the said basis, the appellant would be entitled to Rs.36,920/=. After providing for what was already granted, the appellant would be entitled to a sum of Rs.15,300/= which is rounded off to Rs.15,000/= and thus the appellant is entitled to MACA.1214/05B 3 Rs.18,000/= more. The appellant would also raise a complaint against the rate of interest being awarded at 6 per cent. We are of the view that the rate of interest should be 7.5 per cent. Accordingly, the Appeal is allowed in part and the appellant is allowed to realise a sum of Rs.18,000/= more with interest at 7.5 per cent from the date of the petition till the date of realisation from the second respondent. The amount already awarded will also bear interest at 7.5 per cent from the date of the petition till the date of realisation. The amount is to be deposited by the second respondent. Sd/= K.M. JOSEPH, JUDGE Sd/= M. L. JOSEPH FRANCIS, JUDGE kbk. // True Copy // PS to Judge