IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.M.JOSEPH & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE M.L.JOSEPH FRANCIS TUESDAY, THE 11TH AUGUST 2009 / 20TH SRAVANA 1931 MACA.No. 307 of 2004(D) ------------------------------------ O.P(MV).NO.627/1995 OF MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS TRIBUNAL, PALA. .................... APPELLANT/ PETITIONER: -------------------------------------- GOPALAN, MANGALATHU HOUSE, ELIKULAM. BY ADV. MR.P.C.HARIDAS. RESPONDENTS: ------------------------ 1. K.P. RAVINDRAN, KUZHIKKATTU HOUSE, POOVARANI P.O. 2. K.N. APPU, KIDINJANKUZHIYIL EDAMATTOM P.O., POOVARANY. 3. UNITED INDIA INSURANCE CO.LTD., KOTTAYAM. 4. JOSHY MANUEL, KAAVUMKAL HOUSE, ELIKULAM P.O., KOTTAYAM DISTRICT. 5. VIJAYAKUMAR.R., PARAPPALLIL HOUSE, VANCHIMALA P.O. 6. THE NEW INDIA ASSURANCE CO.LTD., PALA BRANCH. R1 & R2 BY ADV. MR.M.A.T.PAI, R3 BY ADVS. MR.M.A.GEORGE, SMT.DEEPA GEORGE, R6 BY ADV. MR. M.RAJAGOPALAN. THIS MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS APPEAL HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 11/08/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: prv. K.M. JOSEPH & M.L. JOSEPH FRANCIS, JJ. ------------------------------------- M.A.C.A. NO. 307 OF 2004 ----------------------------- DATED THIS THE 11TH DAY OF AUGUST 2009 JUDGMENT K.M.JOSEPH, J This appeal is against the award passed on the claim petition filed under Section 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act 1988. 2. As against the claim of Rs. 2 lakhs, the tribunal awarded Rs. 35,250/- with interest at the rate of 9%. Aggrieved by the inadequacy of the quantum the appellant has approached this court. 3. Heard the learned Counsel for the appellant and the learned Counsel for the Insurance Companies. 4. Counsel for the appellant submits that no amount was awarded towards disability. Appellant is aged 40 years and he was a rubber tapper by profession. Ext. A11 certificate would show that the appellant suffered 50% disability. The injuries M.A.C.A. NO. 307 OF 2004 2 suffered by the appellant are fracture to the left hand wrist and also fracture to the 1,2,3 fingers. He was hospitalized for a total period of 48 days. The tribunal has not awarded any amount for disability. The tribunal found that Ext. A11 would show that the disability assessed is not a total body disability, but a disability based on the performance of his left hand alone and therefore, cannot be accepted. But we find that no amount has been awarded at all for disability. Learned Counsel for the appellant would contend that the tribunal erred in fixing the income of the claimant as Rs.1,500/-. The accident took place on 26-8-1991. The appellant also pointed out that the amount awarded towards loss of amenities is only Rs. 8000/- 5. Learned Counsel for the respondent 3 & 6 supported the award. 6. Having regard to the injuries and the disability certificate issued by the doctor, the tribunal ought to have granted fair M.A.C.A. NO. 307 OF 2004 3 compensation under the heads of disability and loss of amenities. Learned Counsel for the appellant brought to the notice of the court that the appellant's age is 40 years and he was a rubber tapper. Learned Counsel for the appellant also pointed out that a tapper would have the need of both the hands. 7. We see that there is no scope to increase the income as requested by the appellant, particularly having regard to the date of the accident and vocation of the appellant. Having regard to the circumstances, we fix the amount on disability as 18% and on the income which is fixed at Rs. 1500/- per month. The appellant is entitled to Rs. 48,600/- towards disability. Further, the appellant is entitled to get Rs. 2000/- more for loss of amenity. The appellant would be entitled to Rs.50,600/- more. Accordingly, the appeal is allowed in part and the appellant is allowed to realize a sum of Rs. 50,600/- from the respondents 3 and 6 in the same proportion as is ordered by the tribunal. The M.A.C.A. NO. 307 OF 2004 4 amount awarded will bear 7.5% interest from the date of petition till the date of realization. K.M. JOSEPH (JUDGE) M.L. JOSEPH FRANCIS (JUDGE) pkk