IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE M.N.KRISHNAN MONDAY, THE 10TH NOVEMBER 2008 / 19TH KARTHIKA 1930 MACA.No. 516 of 2008() ---------------------- OPMV.1513/2003 of MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS TRIBUNAL, IRINJALAKUDA .................... APPELLANT(S): PETITIONER IN OPMV: ---------------------------------------------------------- SHAJU, S/O.DEVASSY, KODIYAN HOUSE, THOOMPARASSERRY DESOM, KAKKULASSERY VILLAGE, KUZHOOR P.O., MUKUNDAPURAM TALUK, THRISSUR DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.P.V.BABY SRI.A.N.SANTHOSH RESPONDENT(S): RESPONDENTS IN OPMV: ------------------------------------------------------------------ 1. K.D.SUNESAN, KASAMKODATH MANA, ANNAMANADA P.O. 2. SURESH, S/O.KRISHNAN NAMBOODIRI, KARIKUZHIKKATTUMANA HOUSE, KONATHUKUNNU P.O. 3. THE ORIENTAL INSURANCE CO. LTD., MANAPPAT BUILDINGS, NORTH NADA, KODUNGALLUR. ADV. SRI.DILIP MOHAN FOR R1 SRI.RAJESH THOMAS FOR R3 THIS MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS APPEAL HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 10/11/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: KSS M.N. KRISHNAN, J ----------------------- M.A.C.A.No.516 OF 2008 --------------------------------- Dated this the 10th day of November, 2008 JUDGMENT This appeal is preferred against the award of the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Irinjalakuda in O.P.(MV) No.1513/2003. It is an appeal filed by the claimant for enhancement of the compensation. The Tribunal has awarded an amount of Rs. 30,700/- and granted a recovery right to the Insurance Company. 2. I had perused the award and heard the counsel for both sides. A discussion on issue No. 2 would reveal that the claimant sustained a hairline fracture of the transverse process of C-7 and also extra dural haematoma. He was inpatient in the hospital for 7 days. Though disability certificate was produced fixing it at 10%, the Tribunal did not accept it. Hairline fracture is not a serious fracture. There is no documentary evidence to show that on account of this he had to undergo a prolonged treatment. The Tribunal awarded Rs. 6,000/- for actual loss of earning, Rs. 12,000/- for pain and suffering, Rs. 9,700/- for medical expenses and also Rs. 2,000/- towards loss of amenities and enjoyment in M.A.C.A.No.516 OF 2008 -2- life. I feel, considering the nature of injuries sustained in the accident, it cannot be said that the compensation is not just and reasonable, on the other hand it appears to be fairly reasonable. Therefore I do not propose of interfere with the award. The M.A.C.A lacks merit and accordingly dismissed. M.N. KRISHNAN, JUDGE vkm