IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE M.N.KRISHNAN WEDNESDAY, THE 16TH DECEMBER 2009 / 25TH AGRAHAYANA 1931 MACA.No. 2811 of 2009() -------------------------------------- OPMV.1140/2007 of MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS TRIBUNAL, VADAKARA .................... APPELLANT(S): RESPONDENT NO.2 ----------------------------- THE NEW INDIA ASSURANCE COMPANY LTD., EAST NADAKAVU, CALICUT, REPRESENTED BY ITS MANAGER. BY ADVS. MR.KKM.SHERIF MR.A.A.ZIYAD RAHMAN RESPONDENT(S): ------------------------ 1. K.K.RAJESH, S/O.KUNHIRAMAN, AGED 25/2007, CHARAPPARAMBIL HOUSE, KOTHAMANGALAM, P.O.QUILANDY, QUILANDY TALUK, KOZHIKODE DISTRICT. 2. P.P.BINESH, S/O.SREEDHARAN, AGED NO KNOWN, PADIPURACKAL HOUSE, P.O.MANIPURAM, KODUVALLY, KOZHIKODE DISTRICT. 3. K.K.MOHANAN, S/O.DAMODARAN, AGED 45/2007, KOVILY HOUSE, CHETTIKULAM, ELATHUR P.O., KOZHIKODE DISTRICT. R1 BY ADV. MR. K.RAKESH ROSHAN THIS MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS APPEAL HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 16/12/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: ORDER ON IA. NO.3303/2009 IN MACA NO.2811/2009 DISMISSED 16/12/2009 SD/- M.N.KRISHNAN, JUDGE TRUE COPY P.A. TO JUDGE tss M.N. KRISHNAN, J. ........................................... M.A.C.A.No.2811 OF 2009 ............................................. Dated this the 16th day of December, 2009 J U D G M E N T This is an appeal preferred against the award of the Claims Tribunal, Vatakara in OP(MV)No.1140/2007. The claimant sustained injuries in a road accident and the Tribunal has awarded him a compensation of Rs.96,630/= with 7.5% interest. 2. I am afraid that the tribunal has not understood the impact of these type of awards which will have in the society for the reason that unless the court is totally convinced and satisfied about the nature of injury and the disability incurred, the court should be always reasonable in awarding compensations. I make it very clear that this guideline is not to decrease or increase the compensation but to bear in mind the principles to be followed, so that reasonableness is shown at all levels. 3. I have perused para-9 of the award which shows that the claimant had suffered a head injury and CT scan revealed fracture of the frontal bone. Dentistry department : 2 : M.A.C.A.No.2811 OF 2009 found that he had sustained Class-2 fracture of upper teeth and the Tribunal in stead of insisting for the evidence of the claimant who is alive, was satisfied with the photographs to find out his physical condition. The Tribunal has granted Rs.32,000/= as compensation for pain and sufferings and I do not know the yardstick based for the same. Similarly nothing is forthcoming to show what is the income of the person and the Tribunal straightaway fixed it as Rs.4,500/= and when he had claimed only two months loss of earnings, the Tribunal did not find the reason for awarding more but granted 9 months loss of earnings. There must be materials before the court to show that even if the claim for loss of earnings is two months, there are reasons to award it for 9 months. I do not find any discussion there on that aspect as well. The Tribunal has granted an amount of Rs.6,000/= for extra nutritious food and for loss of amenities and inconvenience Rs.12,000/= is given. There must be reasons for the same. But nothing is shown. 4. Therefore, the award passed is not satisfactory and the matter requires interference. So, I set aside the award : 3 : M.A.C.A.No.2811 OF 2009 in toto and remand the case back to the Tribunal with a direction to permit all concerned to produce documentary as well as oral evidence in support of their respective contentions and then decide in accordance with law. I make it clear that the remand is for the purpose of assessing a reasonable compensation and it need not be taken as a direction to the court to reduce the compensation or increase the compensation. The parties are directed to appear before the Tribunal on 21.1.2010. Disposed of accordingly. M.N. KRISHNAN, JUDGE cl : 4 : M.A.C.A.No.2811 OF 2009