IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE C.N.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE V.K.MOHANAN WENESDAY, THE 30TH JULY, 2008 / 8TH SRAVANA, 1930 M.A.C.A.No. 44 of 2003 (B) (O.P(MV) No.2220/1997 of the District Court, Kollam and II Additional M.A.C.T.) APPELLANT/APPLICANT: ----------------------------- SYAMNATH, RAGHAVALAYAM, THEVALLY, KOLLAM. BY ADV. SRI.PIRAPPANCODE V.SREEDHARAN NAIR RESPONDENTS/RESPONDENTS: -------------------------------------- 1. OUSEPH VARGHESE, ONATHAPARAMBIL VEEDU, NO.1039A 22ND DIVISION, COCHIN CORPORATION, COCHIN. 2. THE MANAGING DIRECTOR, K.S.R.T.C., THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. THIS MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS APPEAL HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 08/07/2008, THE COURT ON 30/07/2008 DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: C.N.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR & V.K.MOHANAN, JJ. --------------------------------------------- M.A.C.A.No. 44 of 2003 B --------------------------------------------- Dated this the 30th day of June, 2008 J U D G M E N T Mohanan,J: The appellant herein was the applicant in O.P. (MV) No.2220 of 1997 of the District Court, Kollam which is the IInd Additional M.A.C.T. By the impugned award, the Tribunal allowed only a sum of Rs.36,000/- as compensation and in this appeal, the appellant challenges the above award on the ground of insufficiency of amount fixed as compensation. 2. On 22.12.1995, when the injured along with his wife and daughter were travelling in his car bearing Registration No.KL 2A-7300 from Kollam to Ernakulam and when they reached near Pattanakkad Public School at about 8.30 p.m., a K.S.R.T.C.bus bearing Registration No.KLX-6139 came from the opposite direction, hit on the car as a result of which the appellant sustained injuries on his both eyes and other parts of the body. This is the version of the appellant in the claim petition. During the MACA NO.44 OF 2003 :-2-: course of trial, the Tribunal framed three issues for its consideration and the memorandum of evidence consists of oral testimony of Pws.1 and 2 and Exts.A1 to A10 from the side of the claimant. There was neither oral evidence nor documentary evidence from the side of the respondents. After elaborate consideration of the evidence and materials on record, the Tribunal came to the conclusion that even though he was involved in the accident and sustained certain injuries, admittedly he is still employed and by the alleged accident, he has not lost his earning capacity. The appellant/petitioner has miserably failed to prove the income earned by him. Therefore, the Tribunal had allowed compensation under five heads and the total amount of compensation fixed as Rs.36,000/-. It is the above award challenged in this appeal. 3. We have heard counsel for the appellant and the respondents. 4. It has come out in evidence that the claimant sustained injuries on his face and eyes and glass pieces MACA NO.44 OF 2003 :-3-: struck against his eyes and face and he sustained injury 10cms. length underneath his eye and also other injuries on the rear side of his ear and other part of head and thus he was immediately taken to the K.V.M.hospital and from there, he was referred to the Medical College Hospital where he underwent treatment as inpatient till 5.1.1996. Again he got admitted on 23rd and discharged on 29th and again got admitted on 31.12.1995. It is also his case that from 1.2.1996, he underwent treatment from Aravind Hospital and sustained loss of vision and he is unable to close his right eye and he was subjected to plastic surgery. Thus, it is established that he was treated as an inpatient in the Medical College Hospital from 23.12.1995 to 29.12.1995 and thereafter from 31.12.1995 and 5.1.1996. As evidenced by Ext.A5, the injury is a penetrating injury in the right eye. He had also undergone operation on 23.12.1995 and also on 30.1.1997. Exts.A7,A8,A9 and A10 are the supporting documents to show that he had undergone treatment in various hospitals viz., Medical College Hospital, MACA NO.44 OF 2003 :-4-: Kottayam, Medical College Hospital, Calicut, Aravind Hospital, Madurai etc. But the Tribunal towards the compensation for pain and suffering granted only a sum of Rs.12,000/-, which according to us, is a meagre amount, considering the treatment that he had undergone in various hospitals and therefore, we enhance and refix the amount as Rs.25,000/-. The compensation for loss of leave is refixed as Rs.5,000/- instead of Rs.2,000/-. Only a sum of Rs.7,000/- was allowed by the Tribunal towards the compensation for medical expenses and other incidental expenses including extra nourishment and bystanders expenses. Considering the facts regarding the treatment that the appellant had undergone in various hospitals, we refix the same as Rs.15,000/-. The transportation charge is raised to Rs.5,000/- from Rs.3,000/-. For loss of amenities of life and disfiguration, the amount fixed by the Tribunal is Rs.12,000/- and to make it more fair, by refixing it as Rs.15,000/-. Thus, MACA NO.44 OF 2003 :-5-: we hold that the appellant/petitioner is entitled to get an additional compensation of Rs. 29,000/-. In the result, this appeal is disposed of declaring that the appellant is entitled to get an additional total compensation of Rs.29,000/- (Rupees Twenty Nine Thousand only) with 7.5% interest from the date of filing of the petition till the realisation. The insurance company is directed to deposit the above amount within three months from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment. C.N.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR, Judge V.K.MOHANAN, Judge MBS/ MACA NO.44 OF 2003 :-6-: C.N.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR & V.K.MOHANAN, JJ. -------------------------------------------- M.A.C.A.NO. 44 OF 2003 --------------------------------------------- J U D G M E N T DATED: -7-2007 MACA NO.44 OF 2003 :-7-: