IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE M.N.KRISHNAN WEDNESDAY, THE 9TH SEPTEMBER 2009 / 18TH BHADRA 1931 MACA.No. 344 of 2008() --------------------------------- OPMV.1859/2001 of ADDL.MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS TRIBUNAL, THALASSERY .................... APPELLANT/ PETITIONER ------------------------------------- C.J. MATHEW ,S/O.JOSEPH, AGED 36 YEARS, PIGMY AGENT,NORTH MALABAR GRAMIN BANK, ANGADIKADAVU & PARATTA, RESIDING AT CHAKKALA KUNNEL HOUSE, PO RANDAMKADAVU, KANNUR DISTRICT. BY ADV. MR.M.V.AMARESAN RESPONDENT/3RD RESPONDENT: ------------------------------------------------- UNITED INDIA INSURANCE CO.LTD, BRANCH OFFICE,THALASSERY. BY ADV. MR.K.SANDESH RAJA. THIS MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS APPEAL HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 09/09/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: rs. M.N.KRISHNAN, J. ........................................... M.A.C.A.NO.344 OF 2008 ............................................. Dated this the 9th day of September, 2009 J U D G M E N T This is an appeal preferred against the award of the Additional Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Thalassery in O.P.(MV)No.1859/2001. The claimant sustained injuries in a road accident and he had been awarded a compensation of Rs.33,000/=. It is against that decision the claimant has come up in appeal. 2. The learned counsel for the claimant would contend that the compensation awarded is inadequate and it has to be increased. A perusal of the award would reveal that the claimant was a pigmy agent attached to the North Malabar Gamin Bank and the document produced would show that from 1.7.2000 to 1.6.2001 for a period of 11 months he had been given a discount of Rs.28,009/=. Exts.A5 and A6 also would show that he was unable to do any work from 26.5.2001 to 30.9.2001 or in other words he was deprived from doing any work from 4 months and 4 days. A disability certificate was produced fixing the disability at : 2 : M.A.C.A.NO.344 OF 2008 10%. The evidence adduced by the claimant would establish that he still continues to do the work of an agent and there is no loss of earnings to him on account of the injury sustained. 3. I feel the award requires modification on the following terms. If the income is taken at 28,050/= for 11 months the approximate income for a month would come to Rs.2,550/= which when multiplied by 4 would create a loss of earning of Rs.10,200/= for which only Rs.4,000/= had been given. Therefore, the claimant is entitled to an additional compensation of Rs.6,200/= under that head. Similarly the Tribunal has not awarded any disability compensation on account of the fact that he has not sustained any loss of earning power. But it has to be considered that the disability would cause inconvenience in life for which an amount of Rs.8,000/= has been awarded. I feel a sum of Rs.2000/= further be granted for the reason that he is suffering. Similarly he would have spent money for transport and would have taken some nutritious food and definitely spent some money for medical expenses as well and considering the fact that he had a fracture on the leg : 3 : M.A.C.A.NO.344 OF 2008 and he would have undergone a prolonged treatment as well. Therefore I feel a further amount of Rs.1,800/= can be awarded. Thus making an additional compensation of Rs.10,000/=. 4. In the result, the appeal is partly allowed. The claimant is awarded an additional compensation of Rs.10,000/= with 7% interest from the date of the petition till realisation and the respondent insurance company is directed to pay the said sum within a period of 60 days from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment. Disposed of accordingly. M.N.KRISHNAN, JUDGE cl