IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.R.RAMAN & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.R.RAMACHANDRA MENON MONDAY, THE 14TH DECEMBER 2009 / 23RD AGRAHAYANA 1931 MACA.No. 256 of 2005() ---------------------- OPMV.1233/1999 of MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS TRIBUNAL, THALASSERY .................... APPELLANT(S): APPELLANT/CLAIMANT ----------------- M.V.SHABAREESHA, S/O. BALAN, AGED 24, RESIDING AT CHATHORA HOUSE, P.O.THILLENKERI (VIA) MATTANNUR, KANNUR 670 702. BY ADV. SRI.P.M.PAREETH RESPONDENT(S): RESPONDENTS ------------------- 1. C.BINU S/O. KUMARAN, RAM VILLA, CHEMBILODE, P.O.KOYODE, KANNUR DISTRICT. 2. T.K.PRABHAKARAN, S/O. KRISHNANKUTTY THAYIL HOUSE, MEKOOR, POLIBETTA, SOUTH KOORG. 3. M/S. UNITED INDIA INSURANCE CO.LTD., FORT ROAD, KANNUR-1. BY ADV. SMT.P.K.SANTHAMMA FOR R3 THIS MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS APPEAL HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 14/12/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: P.R.RAMAN & P.R.RAMACHANDRA MENON, JJ. ------------------------------- M.A.C.A. No.256 of 2005 ------------------------------- Dated this the 14th December, 2009 J U D G M E N T Raman, J. Appellant is the injured in a motor accident. He was working as a cleaner in the lorry bearing Registration No.KL- 13A/493. The accident occurred on 10.5.99, as a result of negligence on part of his own driver. He was treated in the Government Hospital, Mananthavady, and thereafter to Koyili Hospital, Kannur. The accident was proved to be due to the negligence on the part of the driver of the lorry. An amount of Rs.39,750/- was awarded by way of compensation with 9% interest. |This appeal is filed seeking enhancement of the compensation. 2. The income of the appellant though claims to be Rs.4500/- per month, in the absence of sufficient evidence to M.A.C.A.No.256 of 2005 2 prove the same, the Tribunal fixed it at Rs.1500/- per month. Though it is contended that the income fixed is low, considering the nature of the evidence, we find that the income as estimated by the Tribunal is not on the lower side. However, while computing the fixation for disability, the Tribunal did not accept the medical certificate, Ext.A7. Though PW.2, the Doctor, was examined, the Tribunal found that the appellant has sustained injury to the extensor of 4th finger and the ‘K’ wire was fixed only to the index finger of metacarpals and the same was removed also. Further, the certificate was issued by none other than the person who was treating him. 3. On an overall consideration of the nature of the injuries suffered, the Tribunal took the percentage of disability for the whole body at 2%, taking the multiplier of ‘17’, since the appellant was aged 24 years at the time of the accident. We are of the view that the percentage of disability as estimated by the Tribunal is on the lower side. Hence, we fix the disability M.A.C.A.No.256 of 2005 3 percentage at 5% instead of 2%. On re-calculating the compensation as above, we find that the appellant is entitled for an amount of Rs.9,180/- on this head, which is rounded to Rs.9,200/-. 4. The Tribunal has awarded only an amount of Rs.8,000/- for pain and sufferings. We increase the same to Rs.10,000/-, thus, the appellant will be entitled to get an amount of Rs.2000/- under this head. 5. For loss of amenity, the appellant was awarded an amount of Rs.3000/-. We increase it to Rs.6000/-, whereby, he will be entitled to an additional compensation of Rs.3000/- more under this head. The compensation awarded under other heads are found to be adequate and reasonable. 6. In the result, the appellant is entitled to get an additional compensation of Rs.14,200/-, which will carry interest at the rate of 7% per annum, from the date of petition till the M.A.C.A.No.256 of 2005 4 date of realization. The third respondent, Insurance Company, shall deposit the same within four months from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment. The appeal is allowed in part as above. P.R.RAMAN, JUDGE P.R.RAMACHANDRA MENON, JUDGE. nj.