IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE C.N.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE C.K.ABDUL REHIM WEDNESDAY, THE 26TH AUGUST 2009 / 4TH BHADRA 1931 MACA.No. 346 of 2007() ---------------------- OPMV.1771/2001 of MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS TRIBUNAL, ALAPPUZHA .................... APPELLANT/PETITIONER IN OP(MV): --------------------------------------- JOSE, S/O.GEORGE, ERASSERIL HOUSE, WARD NO.5, MARARIKULAM NORTH, PANCHAYAT. BY ADV. SRI.A.K.ALEX RESPONDENT(S): RESPONDENTS IN OP(MV): ------------------------------------- 1. MR.MOHANAN C.V., S/O. VASU, SREEKRISHNA SADANAM, S.N.PURAM P.O., CHERTHALA. 2. MR. UDAYAKUMAR,S/O. RUCHIRESWARA PANICKER, CHAKKANATTU KUTTIPURAMHOUSE, WARD NO.II, ARYAD PANCHAYAT. 3. M/S. THE UNITED INDIA INSURANCE COMPANY LTD., BRANCH OFFICE, N.S.S. UNION BUILDINGS, CHERTHALA. ADV. SMT.P.A.REZIYA, S.C. FOR R3 THIS MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS APPEAL HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 26/08/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: C.N.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR & C.K.ABDUL REHIM, JJ. ---------------------------------- M.A.C.A. No. 346 of 2007 ---------------------------------- Dated this the 26th day of August, 2009 J U D G M E N T ---------------------- Abdul Rehim,J. 1. Claimant is in appeal seeking enhancement of the compensation awarded. He sustained injuries when an Autorikshaw hit against the Kinetic Honda Motor Bike on which he was riding. The appellant sustained 'hip central fracture dislocation' along with lacerated injuries and contusions on different parts of the body. He was treated as inpatient at Medical College Hospital, Alapuzha for 12 days and thereafter he continued treatment as outpatient. The appellant was aged 36 years at the time of accident. He was a fish vendor by profession. The injury sustained to the appellant had resulted in persistent disability which is assessed in Ext.A7 certificate as 17%. But the Tribunal adopted the extent of disability at 10%, for the purpose of computing compensation for permanent disability and loss of earning power. A total compensation of Rs.63,150/- was granted. 2. Heard learned counsel appearing for the appellant and Standing Counsel appearing for the 3rd respondent insurance company. The appellant contended that inspite of production of Ext.A6 Discharge Card evidencing details of the MACA346/07 2 injuries sustained and treatment undertaken, and also Ext.A7 Disability Certificate revealing nature of the incapacities and difficulties experienced by the appellant, the Tribunal had reduced the extent of disability to 10% without any basis. It is further contended that the Tribunal had failed in awarding any amount towards loss of amenities and enjoyment in life. It is also contended that the amount of Rs.8000/- granted as compensation for pain and suffering is on the lower side. Further contention of the appellant is that the rate of interest at 6% granted by the Tribunal is highly unrealistic. 3. On a scanning of Ext.A6 Discharge Card, we notice that the appellant sustained 'central fracture dislocation of left hip' with 'sciatic nerve palsy'. He was treated with skeletal traction followed by immobilisation with 'hip spica POP cast'. In Ext.A7 Disability certificate it is stated that he had chronic pain in left hip during all the movements, due to secondary 'osteo arthritis'. It is further stated that terminal movements of left hip are limited and there is limitation of flexion . Relative wasting and weakness of left thigh muscles is also noticed. It is certified that the appellant is experiencing difficulty in doing his routine activities like climbing, lifting weights, etc:. 4. Considering the severe nature of the injuries and the incapacities resulted out of the injuries we are of the opinion that the extent of disability adopted by the Tribunal at 10% is on MACA346/07 3 the lower side. On our moderate estimate we re-fix the extent of disability at 15%. Accordingly the compensation under the head of permanent disability and loss of earning power need be re- fixed at Rs.57,600/-, which will entitle enhancement under that head by a sum of Rs.19,200/-. Considering the continued treatment and nature of injuries we are inclined to enhance the compensation under the head of pain and suffering to Rs.15000/- resulting in increase of Rs.7000/- under that head. We are also persuaded to award compensation of Rs.10,000/- under the head of loss of amenities and enjoyment in life. Thus the appellant is entitled for a total enhancement of compensation of Rs.36,200/-. We are inclined to increase the rate of interest from 6% to 7.5%. 4. In the result the appeal is partly allowed enhancing the total compensation of Rs.63,150/- awarded by the Tribunal by a further sum of Rs.36,200/-. The original compensation as well as the enhancement granted in this appeal will carry interest @ 7.5% per annum from the date of claim petition till payment. The 3rd respondent insurance company is directed to make payment of the amount within a period of three months. C.N.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR, JUDGE. C.K.ABDUL REHIM, JUDGE. okb