IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE M.SASIDHARAN NAMBIAR TUESDAY, THE 31ST MARCH 2009 / 10TH CHAITHRA 1931 MACA.No. 350 of 2009() ---------------------- OPMV.2091/2004 of MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS TRIBUNAL, KOZHIKODE .................... APPELLANT: PETITIONER ---------------------------- SARATH BABU, AGED 19 YEARS, S/O.SURESH BABU,MELEDATH HOUSE, P.O.KUNNAMANGALAM, (VIA) PERINGALAM KOZHIKODE DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.V.S.CHANDRASEKHARAN SMT.PRAISHEEL PRAKASAM RESPONDENT(S): RESPONDENTS ------------------------------------- 1. K.RAGINI, W/O.KRISHNAN NAIR, AGE NOT KNOWN, KAVATTU HOUSE, KUNNAMANGALAM POST, KOZHIKODE DISTRICT. 2. THE NEW INDIA ASSURANCE CO.LTD., DIVISIONAL OFFICE, SILVER PLAZA BUILDING, I.G.ROAD, KOZHIKODE DISTRICT. THIS MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS APPEAL HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 31/03/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: M.SASIDHARAN NAMBIAR,J. =========================== M.A.C.A NO. 350 OF 2009 =========================== Dated this the 31st day of March,2009 JUDGMENT Petitioner in O.P.(M.V) 2091/2004 who was a minor when he filed the O.P on the file of Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Kozhikode through his mother, is the appellant. In the petition he claimed a compensation of Rs.1,00,000/- contending that he sustained injury on 16.9.2003 while pick up van KL-11-E- 7089 hit on the bicycle while he was riding it. Second respondent is the insurer and the first respondent is the owner of the pick up van the insured. First respondent did not contest the case. Second respondent filed a statement admitting the insurance coverage and contending that the vehicle was not having a fitness certificate and therefore they are not liable to indemnify the owner. No oral evidence was M.A.C.A.No.350/2009 2 adduced before the Tribunal. The only material made available to the Tribunal was Ext.A1 wound certificate. Based on the wound certificate Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal awarded a compensation of Rs.3000/-. Challenging that award the appeal is filed contending that the compensation awarded is insufficient. 2. When the appeal came up for admission the learned counsel was directed to make available the records to establish the nature of the injury to substantiate the claim that the compensation awarded is not sufficient. Inspite of several adjournments granted, no records produced. Learned counsel appearing for the appellant submitted that inspite of instructions no material was made available to the counsel and therefore the counsel could not make available any record. 3. In the absence of any material to show that the compensation awarded is not sufficient or that appellant sustained a fracture as claimed, he is M.A.C.A.No.350/2009 3 not entitled to get enhanced compensation. The award shows that Ext.A1 wound certificate produced does not show any external or internal injuries. In such circumstances, the compensation awarded is just and sufficient. There is no merit in the appeal. Appeal is dismissed. M.SASIDHARAN NAMBIAR JUDGE tpl/- M.SASIDHARAN NAMBIAR, J. --------------------- W.P.(C).NO. /06 --------------------- JUDGMENT SEPTEMBER,2006