IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE C.N.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE HARUN-UL-RASHID TUESDAY, THE 28TH OCTOBER 2008 / 6TH KARTHIKA 1930 MACA.No. 272 of 2006() ---------------------- OPMV.1274/2002 of MOTOR ACCIDENTS CLAIMS TRIBUNAL, MUVATTUPUZHA .................... APPELLANT(S)/PETITIONER. ----------------------------------- MANOJ, S/O.KUNJAPPAN, AGED 28 YEARS, RESIDING AT KAPPIL HOUSE, NARAMANGALAM, KUTHUKUZHI PO, KUTTAMANGALAM VILLAGE. BY ADVS. SRI.K.JAJU BABU SMT.M.U.VIJAYALAKSHMI RESPONDENT(S): RESPONDENTS. --------------------------- 1. SURENDRAN, S/O.GOPALAN, MEPUTHUSSERIL, BALSON VALLEY, CHITHIRAPURAM. 2. SHAJU JOSEPH, PULITHANATTU HOUSE, POTTANKADU. 3. THE UNITED INDIA INSURANCE CO.LTD., MUNNAR. ADV. SRI.P.R.RAMACHANDRA MENON FOR R3 SRI.N.M.VARGHESE FOR R1 THIS MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS APPEAL HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 28/10/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: C.N. RAMACHANDRAN NAIR & HARUN-UL-RASHID, JJ. --------------------------------------------------------- M.A.C.A.NO. 272 OF 2006 --------------------------------------------------------- Dated this the 28th day of October, 2008 JUDGMENT Ramachandran Nair, J. Heard counsel appearing for the appellant and Standing Counsel appearing for the Insurance Company. 2. Appeal is filed for enhancement of compensation for the injuries sustained by the appellant in a road accident. The main ground raised by the appellant is that the income fixed at Rs.1,500/- per month for determining compensation is too low. We find force in this contention because even without any proof, the appellant who was employed as a mason and aged only 25 years at the time of the accident would have been able to earn at least Rs.2,500/- per month even on daily wage basis. The appellant has become paralyzed after the accident and is a paraplegia. Therefore, grant of compensation by treating disability as 100% is perfectly justifiable. M.A.C.A. NO. 272/2006 2 3. Counsel appearing for the Insurance Company submitted that when disability is taken as 100%, some reduction should be made towards personal expenses for the earning. We do not think any reduction is called for in this case because being a mason he would have been able to earn Rs.2,500/- per month after meeting the personal expenses. Thus, the appellant will be entitled to get compensation of Rs.5,10,000/- towards disability as against Rs.3,00,000/- granted by the Tribunal. The award will stand confirmed in all other respects. The Insurance Company is directed to deposit the additional compensation with interest at the rate of 7.5% per annum from the date of application till date of payment. Appeal is allowed to the extent indicated above. (C.N. RAMACHANDRAN NAIR) JUDGE (HARUN-UL-RASHID) JUDGE sp/ M.A.C.A. NO. 272/2006 3 C.N. RAMACHANDRAN NAIR & HAURN-UL-RASHID, JJ. M.A.C.A. NO. 272/2006 JUDGMENT 28th October, 2008