IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE M.N.KRISHNAN THURSDAY, THE 1ST OCTOBER 2009 / 9TH ASWINA 1931 MACA.No. 1041 of 2004(B) ------------------------------ (AGAINST THE JUDGMENT IN O.P.(MV)963/98 OF MOTOR ACCIDENTS CLAIMS TRIBUNAL, KOTTAYAM.) APPELLANT(S):/PETITIONER: ----------------------------------- THANKAMMA NARAYANAN, MADAPPALLITHARA HOUSE, VILLANI MICHABHOOMI, ANAKKALLU P.O., KOTTAYAM DISTRICT. BY ADV. SMT.BETTY K.ALUKKA RESPONDENT(S)/RESPONDENT: ------------------------------------ 1. SHAJI, KAMUKUMMATTATHIL HOUSE, KODUMPIDI P.O., KADANADU, PALAI. 2. NEW INDIA ASSURANCE CO.LTD., KOTTAYAM DIVISION, REPRESENTED BY ITS DIVISIONAL MANAGER. ADV. SRI.THOMAS MATHEW NELLIMOOTTIL FOR R2 ADV. SRI. LIJI J. VADAKEDOM FOR R1. THIS MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS APPEAL HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 01/10/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: M.N. KRISHNAN, J. = = = = = = = = = = = = = = M.A.C.A. NO. 1041 OF 2004 = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = Dated this the 1st day of October, 2009. J U D G M E N T This appeal is preferred against the award of the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Kottayam in O.P.(MV)963/98. The claimant, a 53 year old lady and labourer by profession sustained injuries in a road accident whereby she had sustained a fracture on the shoulder and abrasions over the wrist and finger. She was treated as an inpatient for 10 days. No documents were produced to fix quantum of compensation precisely. But the fact remains that she was an inpatient in the hospital for 10 days and she would have spent some amount for treatment besides bystanders expenses as well as expenses for extra nutritious food. So I grant an additional amount of Rs.1,000/- under that head. No amount is granted towards loss of amenities, at least it would have affected her temporarily resulting in loss of amenities and therefore I award a sum of Rs.2,000/- under that head. Therefore the claimant will be entitled to an additional compensation of Rs.3,000/-. M.A.C.A. 1041 OF 2004 -:2:- 2. The learned counsel for the owner wanted to canvass for the position that he was not the owner of the vehicle and therefore he is to be exonerated from the liability. It is not a matter that has to be considered in an appeal filed for enhancement of the quantum. If the law so permits and the respondent namely the owner raises a contention, I will make it very clear that the disposal of this appeal will not stand in the way of adjudicating the interse dispute between the owner and the insurance company. In the result the MACA is partly allowed and the claimant is awarded an additional compensation of Rs.3,000/- with 7.5% interest on the said sum from the date of petition till realisation and the 3rd respondent, insurance company is directed to deposit the same within a period of sixty days from the date of receipt of a copy of the judgment and get it reimbursed from the owner. M.N. KRISHNAN, JUDGE. ul/-