IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
MACA.No. 2584 of 2008()
1. ANTO, S/O. CHERUPARAMBIL OUSEPH,
... Petitioner
Vs
1. K.J. ABDULKHADER, S/O. KANDAYAN KAREEM,
... Respondent
2. SHAJIMON, S/O. AKAPADAN HANEEFA,
3. THE NEW INDIA ASSURANCE CO. LTD.,
For Petitioner :SRI.P.V.BABY
For Respondent :SRI.PMM.NAJEEB KHAN
The Hon'ble MR. Justice M.N.KRISHNAN
Dated :24/09/2009
O R D E R
M.N. KRISHNAN, J
-----------------------------------
M.A.C.A. NO. 2584 OF 2008
------------------------------------------
Dated this the 24th day of September, 2009.
J U D G M E N T
This is an appeal preferred against the award of the Motor Accident
Claims Tribunal, Irinjalakkuda in O.P.(M.V) No.694 of 2003. The claimant
aged 34 years old business man by profession sustained injuries in a
road accident and the Tribunal awarded him a compensation of
Rs.14,200/-. It is against that decision the claimant has come up in
appeal for enhancement. A perusal of the award that is paragraph 10
would reveal that he has sustained a lacerated wound on the both bones
on the forearm another lacerated injury on left eyebrow and another
wound over the right knee. He was an inpatient in the hospital for 3 days.
The document produced shows the disability at 7% but that has not
been accepted by the court below. I fully agree with the Tribunal on the
same. The nature of injuries sustained would never have caused any
disability to the claimant. It is not proved by examining any person and
the injuries seen extracted in the award only reveals that three lacerated
wounds. Nothing to show any treatment after the discharge and
therefore, I feel the claim for disability compensation cannot be granted.
Tribunal was very considerate to the claimant and awarded Rs.6,000/- for
M.A.C.A. NO. 2584 OF 2008 2
pain and suffering and Rs.2,000/- loss of income besides the actual
medical expenses and treatment expenses and Rs.300/- each for buy-
standing and transporting. It is only a just and reasonable compensation
is envisaged Under section 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act and therefore,
the appeal lacks merits and the same is dismissed.
M.N. KRISHNAN, JUDGE.
pm
M.A.C.A. NO. 2584 OF 2008 3
M.A.C.A. NO. 2584 OF 2008 4