IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE M.N.KRISHNAN WEDNESDAY, THE 17TH MARCH 2010 / 26TH PHALGUNA 1931 MACA.No. 2825 of 2009() ----------------------- OPMV.112/2006 of MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS TRIBUNAL, OTTAPALAM .................... APPELLANT / PETITIONER ------------------------------------- ALIMMU, 66 YEARS, S/O. ALAVI, MANDAKKALPADATH HOUSE, (P.O) CHERUTHURUTHY, KALAMANDALAM DESOM SHORNUR BY ADV. SRI.SHEJI P.ABRAHAM SMT.GISA SUSAN THOMAS RESPONDENTS / RESPONDENTS ---------------------------------------------- 1. AJAY,S/O.T.GOPALAKRISHNAN, THANNISSERY THATHATHUVEETTIL HOUSE, PAINKULAM P.O. THRISSUR-1. 2. T.GOPALAKRISHNAN, 1/378,THANNISSERY, THATHATHUVEETTIL HOUSE, PAINKULAM P.O. THRISSUR-1. 3. THE NEW INDIA INSURANCE COMPANY LTD. M.A.LANE, T.B.ROAD, PALAKKAD, POLICY NO.761100/31/05/00588, VALID FROM 22-4-05 T0 21-4-06 ADV. SRI.M.JACOB MURICKAN FOR R3 THIS MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS APPEAL HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 17/03/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: M.N.KRISHNAN,J. ====================== M.A.C.A No.2825 OF 2009 ====================== Dated this the 17th day of March 2010. JUDGMENT This is an appeal preferred against the award of the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal in O.P(M.V).No.112/2006. The claimant while walking along the road sustained injuries in a road accident and the Tribunal has awarded him compensation of Rs.19,300/- with 8% interest. Dissatisfied with the same, he has moved for enhancement. 2. Heard the learned counsel for the appellant as well as the Insurance Company. A perusal of the award and the documents made available before me would establish that the claimant had sustained a fracture of the fibula and his leg was under plaster cast. He was inpatient in the hospital for two days. Considering the nature of the fracture and factum of long plaster cast application there would have been almost immobility for him and therefore I award a sum of Rs.4,000/- more towards pain and suffering. Considering M.A.C.A No.2825 OF 2009 2 the age of the person, fracture of the fibula at that age can cause problem and therefore towards loss of amenities and enjoyment I grant further sum of Rs.2,000/-. A consolidated amount is seen granted for bystander, extra nourishment etc. It appears to be inadequate. I feel a little enhancement can be given for the reason that he would have required assistance of somebody in the house as well which who would have prevented them from attending their duty. So I enhance that amount by Rs.3,000/-. Thus an additional compensation of Rs.7,000/- can be granted. In the result, the M.A.C.A is partly allowed and the claimant is awarded additional compensation of Rs.7,000/- with 8% interest on the said sum from the date of petition and the respondent Insurance Company is directed to deposit the said amount within a period of 60 days from the date of the receipt of a copy of this judgment. M.N.KRISHNAN,JUDGE. mns