IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE A.K.BASHEER & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.Q.BARKATH ALI MONDAY, THE 1ST NOVEMBER 2010 / 10TH KARTHIKA 1932 MACA.No. 1944 of 2010() ----------------------- OPMV.506/2002 of MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS TRIBUNAL, PATHANAMTHITTA .................... APPELLANT(S): PETITIONER ------------------------ BEN STEPHEN, S/O.V.A.STEPHAN, VELASSERIL HOUSE, KUMBAZHA P.O., KOZHENCHERRY TALUK, PATHANAMTHITTA DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.V.SETHUNATH SRI.A.R.GANGADAS RESPONDENT(S): RESPONDENTS --------------- 1. THE MANAGER, KARONAKUNNIL ENTERPRISES, CASINO HOTEL BUILDING, WELLINGTON ISLAND, COCHIN, ERNAKULAM, KERALA, PIN-682 003. 2. KRISHNAKUMAR, S/O.DIVAKARAN NAIR, SREYAS NIVAS, CHENPUMPURAM P.O., CHAMPAKULAM, ALAPPUZHA DISTRICT, PIN-688 506. 3. THE UNITED INDIA INSURANCE CO.LTD., COCHIN, HOSPITAL ROAD, KOCHI-11. THIS MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS APPEAL HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 01/11/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: A.K.BASHEER & P.Q.BARKATH ALI, JJ. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - M.A.C.A.No.1944 OF 2010 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Dated this the 1st day of November, 2010 JUDGMENT Barkath Ali, J. Appellant is the claimant in O.P.(MV)No.506/2002 on the file of Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Pathanamthitta. He sustained the following injuries in a motor accident that occurred on October 8,2001 at about 9.30 a.m. Tear of medial collateral ligament of left ankle and diastasis of distal tibia fibula joint. 2. The accident happened while the claimant was travelling in the autorickshaw from Aluva to Nedumbasseri Airport and reached at Nedumpasseri, it dashed against a tempo van bearing Reg.No.KL-07/W 3009 driven by the second respondent. Alleging negligence against the second respondent, the claimant filed the O.P. before the Tribunal under Section 166 of Motor Vehicles Act claiming a compensation of Rs. 9,20,000/-. 3. Respondents 1 and 2, the owner and the driver of the offending tempo van remained absent before the Tribunal. The third MACA.No.1944/2010 2 respondent, the insurer of the offending tempo van filed a written statement admitting the policy, but denied the liability. 4. Exts.A1 to A17(a) were marked on the side of the claimant before the Tribunal. No evidence was adduced by the contesting third respondent. The Tribunal on an appreciation of evidence found that the accident occurred due to the rash and negligent driving of the offending tempo van by second respondent and awarded a compensation of Rs.1,56,430/- with interest @ 7.5% per annum from the date of petition till realisation and a cost of Rs. 4,500/-. The claimant has now come up in appeal challenging the quantum of compensation awarded by the Tribunal. 5. Heard the counsel for the appellant/claimant. On going through the judgment and award of the Tribunal, we felt that even without issuing notice to the respondents, this appeal can be disposed of. Therefore no notice was issued to respondents. 6. The accident is not disputed. The finding of the Tribunal that the accident occurred due to the negligence on the part of the second respondent is not challenged in this appeal. Therefore, the only MACA.No.1944/2010 3 question which arises for consideration is whether the claimant is entitled to any enhanced compensation. 7. The break up of the compensation awarded is as under : Pain and suffering - Rs. 25,000/- Loss of amenities - Rs. 10,000/- Medical expenses - Rs. 27,750/- Transportation - Rs. 3,680/- Loss of earning - Rs. 52,500/- Damage to clothing - Rs. 500/- Bystander expenses - Rs. 1,000/- Extra nourishment - Rs. 1,000/- Disability - Rs. 35,000/- 8. Counsel for the claimant sought enhancement of compensation for the disability caused. 11. The Tribunal awarded a compensation of Rs. 35,000- for the disability caused to the claimant. The claimant has suffered a disability of 10% as certified by the Medical Board in Ext.A13. The claimant has only a tear of ligament on the left ankle. Taking into consideration the nature of the injury sustained by the claimant and the disability caused to him as certified in Ext.A13, we feel that the compensation awarded by the Tribunal for the disability caused and on other heads is just and reasonable. It follows that the claimant is not MACA.No.1944/2010 4 entitled to any enhancement of the compensation and the appeal has to be dismissed. In the result, the appeal is dismissed. A.K.BASHEER, JUDGE P.Q.BARKATH ALI, JUDGE sv. MACA.No.1944/2010 5