IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE M.N.KRISHNAN TUESDAY, THE 5TH AUGUST 2008 / 14TH SRAVANA 1930 M.A.C.A.No. 111 of 2006 ---------------------- OPMV.217/2000 of MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS TRIBUNAL, TIRUR .................... APPELLANT/PETITIONER: ------------------------------------- K.NAMEERA, D/O.KUNHIMOHAMMED, KARIPPALIYIL HOUSE, P.O.BIYYAM, PONANI TALUK, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.P.CHANDRASEKHAR RESPONDENTS/RESPONDENTS: -------------------------------------------- 1. ABDUL GAFOOR, S/O.HAMZA ALIAS, KUNHIBAVA, PUTHENVEETTIL HOUSE, THUYYAM, EDAPPAL, PONANI TALUK. 2. ABOO BAPPUTTY, S/O.BAPPUTTY, KATTIPARAMBIL HOUSE, P.O.BIYYAM, PONANI TALUK. 3. UNITED INDIA INSURANCE CO. LTD., CHAMRAVATTOM JUNCTION, PONANI. 4. SANTHOSH, S/O.K.R.RAJAN, KAKKAMPARA VEEDU, ERATTUKULAM, ALATHUR, NERA S.N.COLLEGE, PALAKKAD. 5. R.VINODKUMAR, S/O.RAJAN, S.H.K.COMPLEX, KOOTTUPATTA, NEAR PATTAMBI, PALAKKAD. 6. THE NATIONAL INSURANCE CO. LTD., PALAKKAD BRANCH OFFICE, FORTMAIDAN, PALAKKAD. BY ADV. SRI.JOHN KOSHY FOR R3 THIS MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS APPEAL HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 05/08/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: M.N. KRISHNAN, J -------------------------- M.A.C.A. No. 111 OF 2006 ------------------------------- Dated this the 5th day of August, 2008 J U D G M E N T This appeal is preferred against the award passed by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Tirur in O.P.(M.V) No. 217/2000. A perusal of the award would reveal that she had a sutured wound on the front of parietal region. She was admitted as inpatient in the West Fort Hospital, Trichur for 5 days from 14.4.99 to 19.4.99. She was discharged with a direction to come for review. The Tribunal considered the entire materials including the period of hospitalisation and has granted Rs. 5,000/- for pain and suffering, Rs. 2,500/- towards medical expenses, Rs. 500/- for damages to clothing and articles, Rs. 500/- for extra nourishment and Rs. 1,000/- towards transportation. For the nature of the injuries sustained, the compensation awarded is extremely just and reasonable and therefore it does not call for any interference. Therefore the M.A.C.A is dismissed. M.N. KRISHNAN, JUDGE vkm