IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE R.BASANT & THE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE M.C.HARI RANI FRIDAY, THE 2ND SEPTEMBER 2011 / 11TH BHADRA 1933 MACA.No. 1347 of 2011() ----------------------- OPMV.2350/2004 of MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS TRIBUNAL, THRISSUR .................... APPELLANT: PETITIONER -------------- RAMADEVI, W/O.MOHANAN, PEECHAMPILLY HOUSE, PERINGOTTUKARA, KIZHAKKUMMURY, THRISSUR DISTRICT BY ADV. SRI.T.C.SURESH MENON RESPONDENTS : RESPONDENTS --------------- 1. MOHANAN, S/O.PARAMESWAN NAIR, PEECHAMPILLY HOUSE, PERINGOTTUKARA P.O.KIZHAKKUMURY, THRISSUR DISTRICT-680 611. 2. NEW INDIA ASSURANCE COMPANY LTD, NATTIKA P.O.,TRIPRAYAR,THRISSUR DISTRICT-680 567. THIS MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS APPEAL HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 02/09/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: R.BASANT & M.C.HARI RANI, JJ. *********************** M.A.C.A No.1347 of 2011 ***************************** Dated this the 2nd day of September, 2011 JUDGMENT BASANT, J. Claimant is the appellant. She claimed compensation for the loss suffered by her on account of personal injuries suffered in a motor accident which took place on 17.03.2004. Against a claim of Rs.1,40,000/-, the Tribunal awarded a total amount of Rs.29,131/- as per the details given in para.11 of the impugned award, which we extract below: Sl.No. Heads of award Amount awarded 1 Loss of earning Rs. 3,750.00 2 Medical and miscellaneous expenses Rs.11,381.00 3 Bystander's expenses Rs. 1,000.00 4 Transportation expenses Rs. 500.00 5 Extra nourishment Rs. 1,000.00 6 Damages to clothing, etc. Rs. 500.00 7 Pain and suffering Rs. 8,000.00 8 Disability Rs. 3,000.00 Total Rs.29,131.00 rounded off to Rs.29,200/- 2. The matter comes up for admission now. We have heard the learned counsel for the appellant/claimant. The challenge is raised only against the quantification of the loss. M.A.C.A No.1347 of 2011 2 The appellant had suffered undisplaced fracture of the mandible and fracture of two teeth . She was an inpatient for a period of 7 days. The doctor who examined her, an Orthopaedic Consultant had certified the extent of physical disability to be 9%. We have been taken through the said certificate Ext.A8. Fracture of two teeth and undisplaced fracture of the mandible as stated earlier are the only injuries suffered. The Tribunal did not choose to accept and act upon Ext.A8. The doctor who issued Ext.A8 was not examined. The omnibus statement that 9% disability suffered was not accepted by the Tribunal. 3. We have heard the learned counsel for the appellant/claimant in detail. The learned counsel for the appellant/claimant assails the impugned award on the ground that no adequate compensation for the physical disability suffered has been awarded by the Tribunal. 4. The appellant is a house wife. Undisplaced fracture of the mandible and fracture of two teeth (not on the front) cannot be said to have resulted in any reduction in earning capacity. It cannot also be said to have resulted in any cosmetic disfiguration. An amount of Rs.8,000/- has been awarded under the head of pain and suffering. A further amount of Rs.3,000/- M.A.C.A No.1347 of 2011 3 has been awarded under the head of loss of amenities. 5. In any view of the matter, we are not persuaded to agree that the amount awarded by the Tribunal warrants appellate interference by invoking our jurisdiction under Section 173 of the Motor Vehicles Act. We are unable to agree that any permanent disability has resulted except the fracture of the two teeth, for which the amount of compensation awarded (Rs.3,000/-) does not appear to us to be insufficient as to warrant appellate interference. 6. In the result, this appeal is dismissed in limine. (R.BASANT, JUDGE) (M.C.HARI RANI, JUDGE) rtr/