IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE C.N.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.N.RAVINDRAN FRIDAY, THE 9TH JANUARY 2009 / 19TH POUSHA 1930 MACA.No. 434 of 2003(D) ----------------------------------- OP.(MV).NO.1056/1996 OF MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS TRIBUNAL, KOTTAYAM. .................... APPELLANT/ PETITIONER: -------------------------------------- MR.THOMAS GEORGE @ THOMASKUTTY, S/O. GEORGE THOMAS, VETTUKATTU ACKARAPARAMBIL HOUSE, NALUKODY P.O., PAIPPADU VILLAGE, CHANGANACHERRY, KOTTAYAM. BY ADV. MR.P.VIJAYARAGHAVAN. RESPONDENTS/ RESPONDENTS 1 TO 3: ---------------------------------------------------------- 1. MR.SATHISH .P, 1828 LGB COLONY, RAMANADAPURAM, COIMBATORE. 2. MR.RAVEENDRAN ACHARY, S/O. RANGAN ACHARY KELANMATTU HOUSE, VAZHAPPALLY P.O., CHANGANACHERRY. 3. THE NEW INDIA ASSURANCE CO.LTD., REPRESENTED BY ITS BRANCH MANAGER, SALIM BUILDINGS, NEAR HEAD POST OFFICE, CHANGANACHERRY. R3 BY ADV. MR.LAL GEORGE, MR.V.CHITAMBARESH, MR.T.C.SURESH MENON. THIS MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS APPEAL HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 09/01/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: prv. C.N.Ramachandran Nair & P.N.Ravindran, JJ. =================================== M.A.C.A.No.434 of 2003 ===================== Dated this the 9th day of January, 2009. JUDGMENT Ramachandran Nair,J. The appeal is filed for enhancement of compensation for the injuries sustained by the appellant in a road accident. We have heard the learned counsel appearing for the appellant and the learned standing counsel appearing for the Insurance Company. 2. The appellant has produced some photographs showing deformity on his leg. We feel that some enhancement is called for in the award passed by the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal for more than one reason. In the first place, going by the age of the appellant, that is, 25 years at the time of the accident, a multiplier of 18 can be adopted as against 12 applied by the Tribunal. Similarly the income fixed by the Tribunal is very low. He was employed in Space Electronics, Thiruvalla drawing a salary of Rs.2,000/- and besides this, he was paid incentive/commission for sales. In any case at least Rs.2,000/- is to be fixed as the income of the appellant. Applying 18 as the multiplier and Rs.2,000/- as his income, the appellant will be entitled to Rs.1,72,800/- towards compensation for disability as against Rs.86,400/- granted by the Tribunal. Besides this, for loss of earning for six months, the appellant will be entitled to a further sum of Rs.3,000/-. The learned MACA 434/03 -: 2 :- standing counsel for the Insurance Company pointed out that besides granting compensation for disability, the Tribunal allowed Rs.10,000/- towards loss of earning power which is not permissible in view of the decision of the Full Bench of this Court reported in Oriental Insurance Co. Ltd. v. Hariprasad - 2005(4) K.L.T. 977. Following the above decision, we delete the compensation of Rs.10,000/- granted for loss of earning power. However, considering the age of the appellant and the nature of the injuries sustained by him, we feel that for loss of amenities the appellant should be granted a further compensation of Rs.10,000/- in addition to Rs.10,000/- already granted by the Tribunal. The appellant claims compensation for future treatment. Since the appellant has produced Doctor's certificate proving requirement of future treatment, we feel Rs.25,000/- should be reasonable. We accordingly grant a sum of Rs.25,000/- towards compensation for future treatment. The additional compensation granted by us as above will carry interest at the rate of 7.5% per annum from the date of application till date of deposit. The appeal is partly allowed. C.N.Ramachandran Nair, Judge. P.N.Ravindran, Judge. ess 13/1