IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
MACA.No. 1522 of 2005()
1. K.MAHESH, S/O.NARARYANAN,
... Petitioner
Vs
1. SURESH KUMAR, S/O.BHASKARAN,
... Respondent
2. KERALA STATE INSURANCE DEPARTMENT,
For Petitioner :SRI.K.V.PAVITHRAN
For Respondent :GOVERNMENT PLEADER
The Hon'ble MR. Justice C.N.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR
The Hon'ble MR. Justice C.K.ABDUL REHIM
Dated :28/07/2009
O R D E R
C.N.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR & C.K.ABDUL REHIM, JJ.
-----------------------------------
M.A.C.A. No. 1522 of 2005
--------------------------------------
Dated this the 28th day of July, 2009
J U D G M E N T
———————-
Abdul Rehim,J.
The claimant before the Tribunal is in appeal seeking
enhancement of the quantum of compensation awarded. He sustained
injuries while travelling in an Autorikshaw which capsized, resulting
in injuries like fracture of both bones on left leg along with other
injuries. He was treated at Baby Memorial Hospital wherein he had
undergone surgical operations. After that he was on bed-rest for
three months.
2. Learned counsel for the appellant vehemently contended
that the appellant was a worker/salesman in a Bakery and Ext.A7
certificate was produced in order to prove his monthly salary as
Rs.4000/-. But the Tribunal had allowed only an amount of Rs.9000/-
for a period of three months taking his monthly income as Rs.3000/-.
According to the appellant he was under treatment for a prolonged
period and the amount awarded for loss of earning is highly
unrealistic and too inadequate. It is also contended that various
amounts awarded under other different heads are highly on the lower
side.
3. On an evaluation of the evidence on record it is found that
MACA. 1522/05-D
2
the comminuted fracture of both bones on the left leg of the appellant
was managed under procedure shown as “Closed I.M. Nailing” with
locking-cum-medinov nail. It is also evident that the leg was put
under POP slab for a period of about three months. From the nature
of the injuries and details of treatment it is evident that the appellant
would have abstained from his employment at least for a period of six
months. Hence the amount of compensation granted under the head
of loss of earnings need be re-fixed. The Tribunal had granted only an
amount of Rs.5,000/- towards compensation for pain and suffering.
We feel that considering the prolonged treatment the said amount
awarded is on the lower side. Under the above circumstances we feel
that an enhancement of the total compensation by a further sum of
Rs.10,000/- is only just and proper to meet the ends of justice.
In the result the appeal is partly allowed modifying the total
compensation of Rs.51,000/- granted by the Tribunal by a further sum
of Rs.10,000/- which will carry interest @ 9% per annum from the
claim petition till payment. The 2nd respondent is directed to make
payment of the amount within a period of 3 (three) months.
C.N.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR, JUDGE.
C.K.ABDUL REHIM, JUDGE.
okb