IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE A.K.BASHEER & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.Q.BARKATH ALI MONDAY, THE 28TH JUNE 2010 / 7TH ASHADHA 1932 MACA.No. 1795 of 2006() ---------------------- OPMV.1253/2002 OF MOTOR ACCIDENTS CLAIMS TRIBUNAL, NEYYATTINKARA ...................................................................................................................................... APPELLANT/APPLICANT : ---------------------------------- PREMAKUMAR G., AGED 42, S/O. GOPALAN NADAR, KALLARATHALA PUTHUSSERY VEEDU, KUNNATHUKAL, KARAKONAM. BY ADVS. SRI.J.ROBINSON SRI.R.T.PRADEEP SRI.V.VIJULAL RESPONDENTS / RESPONDENTS : ---------------------------------------------- 1. T.ANILKUMAR, ROADARIKATHU PUTHENVEEDU, C.S.T.HOSPITAL JUNCTION, KARAKONAM P.O. 2. JAYACHANDRA KUMAR, PURAMPOKKU PUTHEN VEEDU, KUNNATHUKAL, KARAKONAM. 3. THE MANAGER, ORIENTAL INSURANCE CO. LTD., PADMASREE, NEAR BUS STAND, NEYYATTINKARA. R3 BY ADVS. SRI.MATHEWS JACOB, SENIOR ADVOCATE SRI.P.JACOB MATHEW THIS MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS APPEAL HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 28/06/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: Mn A.K.BASHEER & P.Q.BARKATH ALI, JJ. ------------------------------------------------------------ M.A.C.A.NO.1795 OF 2006 ------------------------------------- Dated this the 28th day of June, 2010 JUDGMENT A.K.Basheer,J The appellant who suffered certain injuries in a road traffic accident, sought compensation from the respondents herein, who are the owner, driver and insurer of the vehicle involved in the accident. 2. The tribunal passed an award granting a sum of Rs.42,600/- towards compensation to the appellant. The tribunal noticed that the appellant had sustained “lacerated wound 4 X 3 cms over the outer aspect of left forearm above wrist, back of right forearm 9 X 4 cm, back of right palm 4 X 3 cm, back of all fingers except thumb right hand etc”, in addition to a compound fracture on the frontal part of skull. Ext.P7 Discharge Card further revealed that the appellant had suffered fracture right ulna shaft. 3. The appellant did not adduce any oral evidence in support of his case. Relying on the documentary evidence, particularly Ext.A9 disability certificate, the Tribunal came to the conclusion that the appellant was entitled to get a sum of Rs.42,600/- towards M.A.C.A.NO.1795 OF 2006 2 compensation. The said award is under challenge in this appeal which has been pending before this Court since 2006. 4. In July, 2009 the appellant filed I.A.No.1911/2009 praying for a direction to send him before a Medical Board to assess his permanent disability. According to the appellant his vision in both eyes was blurred and this total impairment of visions is as a “fall out of the accident”. He further stated that he was not able to stand straight and that he had been “suffering from loss of balance” 5. Keeping in view the above assertion made by the appellant, this Court issued a direction to the Superintendent of the Medical College Hospital Thiruvananthapuram to get the appellant examined by a Board of Doctors and to forward a report to this Court. The certificate issued by the Medical Board which is taken on record as Ext.X1 shows that the Board has assessed his disability as hereunder: 1. Post traumatic bilateral optic atrophy-attributable visual disability-100% 2. Minimum restriction of final 5 degree of supination- pronation-attributable orthopaedic disability-5% 6. Sri. Mathews Jacob, learned Senior counsel who appears for M.A.C.A.NO.1795 OF 2006 3 the Insurance Company points out that there is no material now available on record to show that this sudden deterioration in the visual faculty of the appellant is attributable to or connected with the injury sustained by the appellant in the accident. He points out that Ext.A7 disability certificate produced by the appellant indicates only 15% disability. Further, there was no reference to loss of teeth at that point of time which is now highlighted by the appellant in the affidavit filed by him in support of I.A.1911/2009. He submits that the issue may have to reconsidered by the tribunal. His contention is that the appellant has to necessarily establish that the deterioration in present physical condition is referred to the injuries sustained by him in the accident. We find considerable force in the above contention. 7. Therefore, the award passed in favour of the appellant to the extent if fixes the quantum of compensation is set aside. The tribunal shall pass a revised award refixing the quantum to be awarded to the appellant. It will be open to the appellant and respondent No.3 to adduce further evidence, both oral and documentary, if so advised. The tribunal shall pass the revised award, as expeditiously as possible, at any rate, within three months from the date of receipt of a M.A.C.A.NO.1795 OF 2006 4 copy of this judgment. 8. The parties shall appear before the tribunal on September, 20th 2010. 9. The tribunal shall release the amount if any, deposited by respondent No.3 to the appellant if such a request is made to be adjusted appropriately when fresh award is passed. The Registry shall transmit the report of the Medical Board to the Tribunal. The appeal is disposed in the above terms. A.K.BASHEER, JUDGE. P.Q.BARKATH ALI, JUDGE. pm