IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.PADMANABHAN NAIR MONDAY, THE 26TH NOVEMBER 2007 / 5TH AGRAHAYANA 1929 MFA.No. 505 of 2003() --------------------- OP(MV).933/1994 of MACT, IRINJALAKUDA .................... APPELLANT: PETITIONER ------------- SUNDARA RAJ, S/O. THANGA NADAR, KOZHIPERVILA HOUSE, MULAKUMEEDU P.O., KANAYAKUMARI DISTRICT, TAMIL NADU. BY ADV. SRI.P.V.BABY SRI.A.N.SANTHOSH RESPONDENTS: RESPONDENT ------------------ 1. MANAGING DIRECTOR, KERALA STATE ROAD TRANSPORT CORPORATION, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. * 2. VARGHESE S/O. THOMAS, MALIYEKKAL HOUSE, PALLURUTHY DESOM, RAMESWARAM VILLAGE, COCHIN TALUK. (deleted) (THE NAME OF THE SECOND RESPONDENT IS DELETED FROM THE PARTY ARRAY AT THE RISK OF THE APPELLANT VIDE ORDER DT. 18.7.2007 IN I.A.No.1476/2007) BY ADV. SHRI.JOHNSON P.JOHN, SC, KSRTC THIS MISC. FIRST APPEAL HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 26/11/2007, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: K.PADMANABHAN NAIR, J. ------------------------------- M.F.A.No.505 of 2003 ------------------------------- Dated this the 26th November, 2007. J U D G M E N T The petitioner in O.P.(M.V.)No.933/1994, on the file of the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Irinjalakuda, is the appellant. The appellant met with an accident on 2.1.1994. He filed the original petition claiming compensation impleading the driver and owner of the bus. It was contended that the accident occurred due to the negligence of the driver of the bus. A written statement was filed the respondent denying the negligence alleged. Quantum of compensation was also disputed. The Tribunal found that the accident occurred due to the negligence of the driver of the bus. An amount of Rs.25,000/= was awarded as compensation. Challenging the quantum of compensation as inadequate, the petitioner himself has filed this appeal. 2. The only point arising for consideration in this case is whether the appellant is entitled to get any additional amount as compensation. The evidence adduced in this case shows that the appellant sustained fracture to lower end of fibula on left and right, M.F.A. No.505 of 2003 2 and hence sustained fracture to both sides. So, I am of the view that the Tribunal ought to have awarded Rs.10,000/= more, taking into account of the disability and other inconvenience suffered etc. Hence, the appellant is entitled to get an additional compensation of Rs.10,000/=. In the result, the appeal is allowed in part. An award is passed allowing the appellant to recover an amount of Rs.10000/= as additional compensation from the respondents, with 6% interest from the date of petition, till the date of realisation. The respondents are directed to deposit the above amount in favour of the appellant. On deposit, the appellant can withdraw the amount. K.PADMANABHAN NAIR, JUDGE nj. K.PADMANABHAN NAIR, J. ------------------------------- M.F.A.No.505 of 2003 J U D G M E N T Dated:26th November, 2007. -------------------------------