IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.PADMANABHAN NAIR TUESDAY, THE 15TH JANUARY 2008 / 25TH POUSHA 1929 MFA.No. 787 of 2000() --------------------- OP.1199/1994 of ADDL. DISTRICT COURT, PATHANAMTHITTA .................... APPELLANT/PETITIONER: ----------- M.V.GEORGE, KUNNEL USHAMCHERIL, MUNDIYAPPALLY, KAVIYOOR, THIRUVALLA, PATHANAMTHITTA DIST. BY ADV. SRI.THAMPAN THOMAS RESPONDENTS/RESPONDENTS: ------------- 1. K.SURESH, 22 YEARS, S/O.KRISHNANKUTTY NAIR, SURESH BHAVAN, MUTHOOR, THIRUVALLA VILLAGE, (LICENCE NO.1133/91) 2. V.N.KRISHNANKUTTY NAIR OF -DO- -DO- 3. THE ORIENTAL INSURANCE CO. LTD., THIRUVALLA. R3 BY ADV. SRI.P.V.JYOTHI PRASAD SRI.P.HARIDAS THIS MISC. FIRST APPEAL HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 16/01/2008, THE COURT ON 15/01/2008 DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: K. PADMANABHAN NAIR ,J. ------------------------------------------------- M.F.A.No.787 of 2000 ------------------------------------------------- Dated, this the 15th day of January, 2008 JUDGMENT The appellant sustained injuries in a motor vehicle accident on 8.6.1994. He filed a petition claiming compensation, impleading the owner, rider and insurer of the scooter involving in the accident. It was alleged that the accident occurred due to the negligence of the rider of the scooter. Owner and rider though filed a written statement did not contest the matter. Insurer alone contested the matter. The main contention raised was that there was violation of the policy conditions. Quantum of compensation claimed also disputed. Tribunal after considering the fact that the petitioner sustained fractures and he had passed more than 75 years gave a consolidated amount of Rs.19,000/- without stating any reasons for fixing the same. Evidence on record shows that the petitioner sustained compound fracture of right lower leg and fracture midshaft. He sustained other injuries also. He was admitted in the hospital on two occasions. He produced medical bills showing that he had spent more than Rs.22,911.90 ps. for treatment alone. The entire claim was rejected on the ground that the doctor who issued the medical bills was not examined. Appellant was not awarded any amount separately as compensation for pain and suffering. I do not find any reason to reject the medical bills produced by the appellant. Considering all aspects of the matter I am of the view that an amount of Rs.22,912/- is allowed for MFA No.787/2000 2 treatment purposes and another Rs.3,000/- for pain and suffering. So the appellant is entitled to an additional compensation of Rs.25,912/- which is rounded to Rs.26,000/-. It will carry interest at the rate of 6% per annum from the date of petition till the date of realisation. In the result, appeal is allowed in part. Appellant is allowed to recover an additional compensation of Rs.26,000/- with 6% interest per annum from the date of petition till the date of realisation. Third respondent insurer is directed to deposit the entire amount. C.M.P.No.4330/2000 in M.F.A.No.787/2000 will stand dismissed. K. PADMANABHAN NAIR, JUDGE. cks MFA No.787/2000 3 K.PADMANABHAN NAIR, J. M.F.A.No.787 of 2000 JUDGMENT 15th January, 2008.