IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE M.N.KRISHNAN TUESDAY, THE 15TH DECEMBER 2009 / 24TH AGRAHAYANA 1931 MACA.No. 2487 of 2008() ------------------------------------ OPMV.1128/2002 of MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS TRIBUNAL, TRIVANDRUM .................... APPELLANT(S): CLAIMANT ---------------------- BENOY, S/O.BALAKRISHNAN, AGED 30 YEARS, COMPANY VILA VEEDU, BHAGAVATHY NADA P.O., BALARAMAPURAM, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. BY ADV. MR.SERGI JOSEPH THOMAS RESPONDENT(S): RESPONDENTS -------------------------- 1. K.MANOHARAN, RAJEEV MANDIRAM, ARCHANA NAGAR, PONGUMOODU. 2. UNITED INDIA INSURANCE COMPANY LIMITED REPRESENTED BY ITS DIVISIONAL MANAGER, DIVISIONAL OFFICE, L.M.S. COMPOUND, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 3. THE DIVISIONAL MANAGER, ORIENTAL INSURANCE COMPANY LIMITED, DIVISIONAL OFFICE 2, ST.MARY'S BUILDING, ULLOOR, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. R3 BY ADV. MR.RAJESH THOMAS THIS MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS APPEAL HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 15/12/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: ORDER ON IA. 2973/ 2008 IN LAA. NO.2487/2008 CLOSED 15/12/2009 SD/- M.N.KRISHNAN, JUDGE TRUE COPY P.A. TSS JUDGE tss M.N. KRISHNAN, J. ........................................... M.A.C.A.No.2487 OF 2008 ............................................. Dated this the 15th day of December, 2009 J U D G M E N T This is an appeal preferred against the award of the Claims Tribunal, Trivandrum in OP(MV)No.1128/2002. The claimant sustained injuries in a road accident and the Tribunal has awarded him a compensation of Rs.61,050/=. Dissatisfied with the same, the claimant has come up in appeal. 2. I have perused the award and heard the learned counsel for the appellant as well as the insurance company. It can be seen from the materials available that the claimant had sustained a lacerated wound on the left knee, abrasion on the right elbow and a fracture of the lower end of the radius right and base of the first metacarpal. He was treated in the Medical College Hospital, Trivandrum by closed manipulative reduction. Ext. X4 is the disability certificate issued by the District Medical Board, Trivandrum. Since it is marked as a court exhibit, certainly it should have been on the basis of reference by court, the disability would have : 2 : M.A.C.A.No.2487 OF 2008 been assessed. I also feel that for a fracture of the lower end of the radius and metacarpal 15% disability is on the higher side. Since the person is referred and a report is obtained by a competent board, I consider it safe to increase it to 10% and fix the compensation. In the light of the latest decision of the Apex Court in Sarla Verma v. Delhi Transportation Corporation (2009 ACJ 1298) for the age group of 26, the multiplier to be used is 17 and not 18. So, when it is worked out that way, fixing the income at Rs.2,000/= the annual loss would come to Rs.2,400/= which when multiplied by 17, it would be Rs.40,800 of which Rs.30240/= is granted under that head which means an additional compensation of Rs.10,560/= for permanent disability. On all other heads proper compensation has been awarded. 3. Therefore, the MACA is partly allowed and the claimant is awarded an additional compensation of Rs.10,560/= with 7.5% interest on the said sum from the date of the petition till realisation and the 2nd respondent United India Insurance Company is directed to deposit the : 3 : M.A.C.A.No.2487 OF 2008 said amount 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