IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
MACA.No. 1992 of 2005()
1. M.I. VARGHESE, AGED 45 YEARS,
... Petitioner
Vs
1. K. MOOSA, S/O. MARAKKAR,
... Respondent
2. A.K. VELAYUDHAN, S/O. A.K. VELU,
3. UNITED INDIA INSURANCE CO.LTD.,
For Petitioner :SRI.DEVIDAS.U.K
For Respondent :SRI.THOMAS MATHEW NELLIMOOTTIL
The Hon'ble MR. Justice M.N.KRISHNAN
Dated :19/06/2008
O R D E R
M.N.KRISHNAN, J.
--------------------------
M.A.C.A. No. 1992 OF 2005
---------------------
Dated this the 19th day of June, 2008
JUDGMENT
This appeal is preferred against the award passed by the
Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Manjeri, in OP(MV) 439/01. The
claimant, a milk vendor by profession aged 40 years, sustained
injuries in a road accident whereby he suffered a crush injury on the
right foot which resulted in the amputation of the right little toe. He
has a compound fracture of the third meta carpel. The medical board
assessed his disability at 3%. The Tribunal fixed his income at
Rs.15,000/- per annum and awarded him a compensation of
Rs.21,308. It is against that decision, the present appeal is preferred
by the claimant.
2. Heard the counsel for both sides. Learned counsel for the
appellant would contend that the Tribunal has erred in awarding
inadequate amount as compensation. It can be seen that he was
treated as an inpatient in the hospital for 32 days and certainly he
would not have been in a position to do the work for a period of three
months. I grant him an amount of Rs.4,500/- towards loss of earning
MACA No.1992/05 2
i.e. Rs.1,500×3. For the long period of hospitalisation with crush
injury and amputation of toe, there will be pain and suffering and the
amount awarded under pain and suffering is only Rs.8,000/-which
also is enhanced to Rs.10,000/-, i.e. an enhancement of Rs.2,000/-.
When the disability compensation is calculated at the rate of
Rs.18,000/- as income per annum, the difference will come to
Rs.1,440/- which also the claimant is entitled to get. It has to be
borne in mind that the Tribunal has not awarded any compensation
for loss of amenities in the case where there has been amputation of
the toe, a serious fracture on the meta tarcel and also a crush injury.
I award Rs.4,000/- under that head.
3. Learned counsel submits before me that it was on account
of a hit by a bus the cycle was damaged and no compensation is
awarded. It is true that no bills are produced. But the facts remains
that on account of the accident the central frame of the cycle has
been broken which shows that it was a serious damage. In the
absence of any materials, I award Rs.1,000/- as damage to the cycle
as well as milk that is loss in the accident. Therefore, the additional
compensation would come to Rs.12,940/-, which I round as
Rs.13,000/-.
MACA No.1992/05 3
In the result, the MACA is partly allowed and the claimant is
awarded an additional compensation of Rs.13,000/- with 7% interest
on the said sum from the date of petition till realisation. The
Insurance Company is directed to deposit the amount within 60 days
from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment.
M.N.KRISHNAN, JUDGE
vps
MACA No.1992/05 4
MACA No.1992/05 5