IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE M.N.KRISHNAN TUESDAY, THE 28TH OCTOBER 2008 / 6TH KARTHIKA 1930 MACA.No. 514 of 2008() ---------------------- OPMV.1104/2003 of MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS TRIBUNAL, IRINJALAKUDA .................... APPELLANT(S)/ PETITIONER IN OP(MV) --------------------------------- PAULSON, S/O.ANTONY, THEKKOODAN HOUSE, RESIDING AT KORANODY DESOM, VARANDARAPILLY VILLAGE AND P.O., MUKUNDAPURAM TALUK, THRISSUR DISTRICT. BY ADVS. SRI.P.V.BABY SRI.A.N.SANTHOSH RESPONDENT(S)/ RESPONDENTS IN OP(MV) ----------------------------------- 1. THE MANAGING DIRECTOR, KERALA STATE ROAD TRANSPORT CORPORATION, FORT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 2. ANTONY JOHN, S/O.M.P.JOHN, MADEKKAL HOUSE, KIZHAKKAMBALAM P.O., ALUVA. ADV. SHRI.JOHNSON P.JOHN, SC, KSRTC THIS MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS APPEAL HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 28/10/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: M.N. KRISHNAN, J ----------------------- M.A.C.A.No. 514 OF 2008 --------------------------------- Dated this the 28th day of October, 2008 JUDGMENT This appeal is preferred against the award of the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Irinjalakuda in O.P(MV) No. 1104/2003. The claimant sustained injuries in a road accident and he had been awarded compensation of Rs. 30,350/-. It is against that decision the appellant come up in appeal for enhancement. 2. Heard. It is is seen that the claimant had sustained a fracture of the lower 3rd of the right ulna and he was inpatient in the hospital for three days. He had produced a disability certificate of 9% which was not accepted by the Tribunal and had granted him only an amount of Rs. 3,000/- towards loss of amenities and enjoyment in life. The Tribunal opined that the disability Certificate is not issued by the Medical Board and the person who had issued the certificate has not been examined. It may not be correct to accept the disability certificate as such in the absence of concrete materials to substantiate the same. But the fact remains that he had sustained fracture of the ulna and he had undergone prolonged M.A.C.A. No. 514/2008 -2- treatment including application of plaster cast for a long time. He had expended more than Rs. 9,000/- for his treatment. So it is certain that he would have been prevented from enjoying his life for a considerable length of time and a fracture at the age of 41 would have caused him atleast temporary disability for sometime. So taking into consideration this aspect, I am inclined to fix temporary disability plus loss of amenities at Rs. 10,000/- out of which Rs. 3,000/- has been awarded. So the claimant will be entitled to get an additional compensation of Rs. 7,000/- with 7% interest on the said sum from the date of petition till realisation and the respondents are directed to pay the same within a period of 60 days from the date of receipt of copy of the judgment. M.N. KRISHNAN, JUDGE vkm