IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE R.BASANT & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE V.CHITAMBARESH TUESDAY, THE 8TH NOVEMBER 2011 / 17TH KARTHIKA 1933 MACA.No. 1575 of 2011() ----------------------- OPMV.2830/2006 of MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS TRIBUNAL, ERNAKULAM .................... APPELLANT(S)/PETITIONER: -------------- LIGITHA GEORGE (MINOR) AGED 17 YEARS D/O.LINCY GEORGE, REPRESENTED BY NEXT FRIEND SMT. LINCY GEORGE, W/O.GEORGE, PULIKKAL VEETIL, ELAMAKKARA , COCHIN - 26. BY ADV. SRI.K.JANARDHANAN SRI.K.J.MANU RAJ RESPONDENT(S): RESPONDENTS --------------- 1. M.JINISH GEORGE, S/O.M.GEORGE JOSEPH MULLATH HOUSE, THENNILLAPPURAM, PALAKKADU PIN - 678 682. 2. V.SURESH KUMAR, S/O.VIJAYAN, KANJIRAVILA, THEKKETHIL, MANJUMMALKECH, PUNALUR VILAKKUDI VILLAGE, PATHANAPURAM TALUK, QUILON, PIN - 689 695. 3. UNITED INDIA INSURANCE CO. LTD. DIVISIONAL OFFICE, ERNAKULAM, PIN - 682 011. BY ADV. SMT.DEEPA GEORGE FOR R3 THIS MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS APPEAL HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 08/11/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: R.BASANT & V.CHITAMBARESH, JJ. ------------------------------- M.A.C.A.No.1575 of 2011 ------------------------------- Dated this the 8th of November, 2011 J U D G M E N T Basant, J. Claimant is the appellant. She, a minor child, aged 12 years at the time of the accident, claimed compensation for personal injuries suffered by her in a motor accident that occurred on 02.04.2006. She was a student at the relevant time. Against a total claim of Rs.1,21,000/-, the Tribunal awarded a total amount of Rs.23,240/- as shown below: i) Medical bills : Rs.17,240.00 ii) Conventional heads in addition to medical bills : Rs. 6,000.00 ------------------- Total : Rs.23,240.00 ======== The insurance company was made entirely liable under the impugned award. 2. We have heard the learned counsel for the appellant and the learned counsel for the insurance company. Challenge is raised on the ground that the quantum of compensation awarded is is not adequate. 3. Called upon to explain and be specific, the learned counsel for the appellant contends that the Tribunal has not properly M.A.C.A.No.1575 of 2011 2 adverted to the quantum of compensation payable. The appellant sustained Type I Open Fracture B/B (L) Forearm. The Tribunal did not even refer to this. The claimant has congenital Neurological disorder, it is evident from the records. She has suffered punctured wound over middle third junction dorsal aspect. X-ray confirmed that she has fracture of left forearm and ORIF with K wire fixation was done under general anestatia. She was inpatient for a total period of 10 days (2.4.2006 to 12.4.2006) . 4. We are in agreement with the learned counsel for the appellant that the Tribunal had not properly adverted to the claims staked by the claimant. The award of a lumpsum global conventional amount of Rs.6,000/- without specific advertance to the nature of injuries suffered, the period of treatment etc. is to say the least, not proper. We are in agreement with the learned counsel for the appellant that the claim for compensation deserves to be considered afresh. 5. For pain and suffering, considering the nature of injuries and the nature of trauma that the child has suffered, we are satisfied that an amount of Rs.15,000/- can be awarded as compensation. For medical and miscellaneous expenses (including M.A.C.A.No.1575 of 2011 3 Bystander's expenses, extra nourishment etc.) we are satisfied that a total amount of Rs.25,000/- can be awarded. Bills for Rs.17,201/- have been produced. For loss under the head of interruption of educational progress, we are satisfied that an appropriate amount deserves to be awarded. 6. The above discussions lead us to the conclusion that the appellant is entitled to total amount of Rs.45,000/- as compension as per the details given below:- i) Pain and Sufferings : Rs.15,000/- ii) Medical and Miscellaneous expenses (including medical bills produced for Rs.17,201/-), compensation for Bystander's expenses, extra nourishment etc. : Rs.25,000/- iii) Interruption of educational progress : Rs.5,000/- The appellant will consequently be entitled to a further sum of Rs.21,760/- (45,000 - 23,240) in addition to the amount already awarded by the Tribunal under the impugned award. 7. In the result: a) This M.A.C.A. is allowed in part; M.A.C.A.No.1575 of 2011 4 b) The appellant is found entitled to a further amount of Rs.21,760/- (Rupees twenty one thousand seven hundred and sixty only) in addition to the amount already awarded by the Tribunal under the impugned award; c) We make it clear that the entire amount of compensation shall carry interest at the rate and for the period as directed by the Tribunal; d) The proportionate cost for the proceedings before the Tribunal shall be awarded on the entire amount of compensation calculated as per the dictum in Jeena v. Satheesh Babu.K. (2011 (3) KLT 943). R.BASANT, Judge. V.CHITAMBARESH, Judge. nj.