IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE C.N.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE C.K.ABDUL REHIM TUESDAY, THE 20TH JANUARY 2009 / 30TH POUSHA 1930 MACA.No. 1938 of 2005() ----------------------- OPMV.965/2004 of MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS TRIBUNAL, OTTAPALAM .................... APPELLANT(S): APPELLANTS/3RD RESPONDENT. ---------------------------------------- UNITED INDIA ASSURANCE CO.LTD., FAIZAL BUILDING, MAIN ROAD, OTTAPPALAM, REPRESENTED BY ITS ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICER, REGIONAL OFFICE, ERNAKULAM. BY ADV. SRI.N.S.MOHAMMED USMAN RESPONDENT(S): PETITIONER. -------------------------- 1. HARIDAS, S/O.AYYAPPAN, AGED 42 YEARS, POOLAKKAL HOUSE, GANESHGIRI, SHORANUR, OTTAPPALAM TALUK. 2. HARIDASAN, S/O.BALAKRISHNAN, AGED 30 YEARS, VILAKKATHALA HOUSE, NEDUGOTTOOR, SHORANUR. 3. P.MADHAVIKUTTY, AGE NOT KNOWN, S/O.N.V.BALAKRISHNAN, 143, SOUTHERN RAILWAY QUARTERS NO.32 F-3, SHORANUR. ADV. SRI.K.C.ELDHO FOR R1 SRI.MALLENATHAN.M. FOR R1 THIS MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS APPEAL HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 20/01/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: C.N.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR & C.K.ABDUL REHIM, JJ. .................................................................... M.A.C.A. No.1938 of 2005 .................................................................... Dated this the 20th day of January, 2009. JUDGMENT Ramachandran Nair, J. Appeal is filed by the Insurance Company seriously objecting against the award passed by the MACT. We have heard counsel appearing for the respondents also. On going through the award and after hearing the parties, we do not think the award is sustainable because MACT has liberally granted compensation more than what is claimed under all heads without taking note of first respondent's regular employment in the Railways. The claimant's hospitalisation was only for one day and the major injury to him is amputation of part of the left thumb. There is no finding that this caused any disability from earning in as much as the claimant was allowed to continue in service and he would be getting salary. Therefore, the concept of loss of earning during service does not arise at all. If at all claimant is entitled to compensation for loss of earning, it should be considered only after retirement when he could take up some other job. It is seen 2 that Rs.15,000/- is granted towards medical expenses and a further sum of Rs.5,000/- for future treatment without MACT caring to verify whether such expenditure was incurred or likely to be incurred by the claimant. On the whole, the order is absolutely arbitrary and untenable. We, therefore, set aside the award with direction to the MACT to hear both sides and decide the matter afresh, if required, after taking evidence and after collecting documents produced by the parties. The compensation deposited will be retained by the MACT and as and when award is passed, eligible amount will be released to the claimant and the balance if any will be refunded to the Insurance Company. There will be direction to the MACT to hear the parties and decide the matter afresh within a period of four months from date of production of copy of this judgment by either party. The appeal is disposed of as above. C.N.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR Judge C.K.ABDUL REHIM Judge pms