IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
MFA No. 873 of 2002(B)
1. JAYA KRISHNAN S/O.CHAMI, IRUPPIKKAL
... Petitioner
Vs
1. HAMZA S/O. MUHAMMED KUTTY,
... Respondent
2. O.A.ALI HUSSAIN,CHINGAVANAM KALATHIL
3. THE UNITED INDIA INSURANCE COMPANY LTD.,
4. O.RAYANKUTTY S/O. KUTTU ODUVANGATTIL
5. K.AJITHKUMAR TGHARUMATTOOR KALAM
6. THE NATIONAL INSURANCE COMPANY LIMITED
For Petitioner :SRI.SANTHEEP ANKARATH
For Respondent :SRI.P.JAYASANKAR
The Hon'ble MR. Justice J.B.KOSHY
The Hon'ble MR. Justice K.T.SANKARAN
Dated :14/01/2008
O R D E R
J.B.KOSHY & K.T.SANKARAN, JJ.
----------------------------------------------------
M.F.A. NO. 873 OF 2002
----------------------------------------------------
Dated this the 14th January, 2008
JUDGMENT
J.B.KOSHY, J.
The appellant/claimant sustained fracture on tibia and fibula in a
motor accident occurred on 4.2.1999. He claimed a compensation of
Rs.two lakhs. The Tribunal awarded Rs.45,338/- with interest at the rate of
9% per annum from the date of application till realisation and Rs.900/- as
costs. Only the quantum of compensation is disputed in the appeal.
2. According to the appellant, he was a mason earning Rs.4,500/-
per month. The Tribunal rightly found that there is no evidence to prove the
nature of work and monthly income of the appellant. He did not depose
also regarding the nature of accident. In support of the contention that the
accident occurred due to the negligence of the driver of the vehicle insured
by respondents 3 and 6, he produced Ext.A1 copy of FIR and Ext.A2, copy
of scene mahazar. Ext.A1 FIR itself shows that he was travelling in the
jeep precluding his leg outside. Therefore, the Tribunal found that he was
also negligent and his negligence was apportioned at 25%. After
calculating the compensation at Rs.60,450/-, 25% compensation was
deducted. By Ext.A9 certificate the doctor has certified that there is 18%
disability. The Tribunal did not accept the same. We have already stated
that there was no evidence to show that he was an earning member at the
M.F.A. NO.873 OF 2002
:: 2 ::
time of accident. The doctor was examined as PW1. The Tribunal stated
that, according to the doctor, 18% disability is to the limb and not to the
whole body. The Tribunal has awarded Rs.17,500/- as compensation for
disability and another Rs.11,000/- as injury compensation. For pain and
suffering, Rs.11,000/- was granted. Even if the notional income of a non-
earning person is taken as his monthly income and compensation is
granted for 10% disability, he would not have received more than what is
assessed by the Tribunal. Considering the total amount granted and the
nature of injuries, we are of the opinion that no enhancement is
necessary.
The Miscellaneous First Appeal is, therefore, dismissed.
(J.B.KOSHY)
Judge
(K.T.SANKARAN)
Judge
ahz/
J.B.KOSHY & K.T.SANKARAN, JJ.
——————————————-
——————————————-
M.F.A.NO. 873 OF 2002
JUDGMENT
14th January, 2008
——————————————-