IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE R.BASANT & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.R.RAMACHANDRA MENON MONDAY, THE 9TH FEBRUARY 2009 / 20TH MAGHA 1930 MACA.No. 2824 of 2008() ----------------------- OPMV.85/2002 of ADDL.MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS TRIBUNAL, KOLLAM .................... APPELLANT(S): PETITIONERS: -------------------------- SURENDRAN PILLAI, S/O.KESAVAN PILLAI, SUJITH BHAVAN, VENGARA, THODIYOOR, KARUNAGAPPALLY. BY ADV. SRI.B.RADHAKRISHNA PILLAI SMT.S.AMBIKA DEVI SRI.P.U.SHAILAJAN SMT.K.B.REKHA SRI.R.JYOTHIKRISHNAN RESPONDENT(S): RESPONDENTS: --------------------------- 1. A.SHAJIMON, ILLATHU PUTHEN VEEDU, ERUVA P.O., KAYAMKULAM, ALAPPUZHA. 2. NATIONAL INSURANCE CO. LTD., KAYAMKULAM. 3. HOCHUMIN, S/O.THANKAPPAN, SUDARSANA MANDIRAM, THODIYOOR, KARUNAGAPPALLY. 4. THE ORIENTAL INSURANCE CO. LTD., KOLLAM. ADV. DR.ELIZABETH VARKEY FOR R4 THIS MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS APPEAL HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 09/02/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: R.BASANT & P.R.RAMACHANDRA MENON, JJ. ------------------------------------ M.A.C.A. No.2824 of 2008 ------------------------------------- Dated this the 9th day of February, 2009 JUDGMENT R.BASANT, J. Claimant is the appellant. He claimed compensation for personal injuries suffered in a motor accident. Injuries were simple. The appellant was in the hospital for a period of 13 days. A total amount of Rs.9,200/- was awarded as compensation. 2. The appellant claims to be aggrieved by the impugned award. What is the grievance ? The counsel contends that though the appellant was in the hospital for a period of 13 days not even one month's loss of earnings has been awarded. The claim for loss of earnings was allowed only for a period of 15 days. This is unjust and unfair, submits the counsel. 3. Secondly the learned counsel submits that for pain and suffering, an amount of Rs.500/- alone has been awarded. It must have been noted that the appellant was in the hospital for a period of 13 days. The assessment of compensation under the head `pain and suffering' is not realistic. It may also be taken M.A.C.A. No.2824 of 2008 2 note of that no amount has been awarded under the head of `loss of amenities', submits the learned counsel. 4. Thirdly it is contended that the interest awarded is only @ 6% per annum. This is unrealistic. At least 7.5% per annum must have been awarded, contends the counsel. 5. We find merit in the contentions raised. We are satisfied that the loss of earning ought to have been granted at least for a period of 45 days. The appellant is entitled to a further amount of Rs.2,000/- under that head. 6. Under the head of `pain and suffering' only an amount of Rs.500/- has been awarded. We take note of the nature of injuries as also the period of hospitalisation. We are satisfied that an amount of Rs.3,500/- can be granted under that head. 7. We are further satisfied that interest @ 7.5% per annum ought to have been granted. 8. The appellant succeeds to the above extent. We do not find any reasons to interfere on any other grounds. 9. In the result: a) This appeal is allowed; b) The impugned award is modified. A further amount of Rs.2,000/- is awarded under the head of loss of earnings and a M.A.C.A. No.2824 of 2008 3 further amount of Rs.3,000/- is awarded under the head of pain and suffering. Interest shall be paid @ 7.5% per annum on the total amount. (R.BASANT, JUDGE) (P.R.RAMACHANDRA MENON, JUDGE) rtr/-