IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
MACA.No. 616 of 2003()
1. ANTONY @ BABY, S/O. ANTONY,
... Petitioner
Vs
1. M.V.JOSEPH S/O. VARKEY, MANTHIYIL HOUSE,
... Respondent
2. ELDO.N.P. S/O. PAULOSE N.K.,
3. UNITED INDIA INSURANCE CO. LTD.,
4. M.LAKSHMAIAH S/O. SUBBARAYUDU,
5. M.RAMAYYA, AGED 23 YEARS,
6. UNITED INDIA INSURANCE CO. LTD.,
For Petitioner :SRI.J.S.AJITHKUMAR
For Respondent :SRI.P.JAYASANKAR
The Hon'ble MR. Justice J.B.KOSHY
The Hon'ble MR. Justice P.N.RAVINDRAN
Dated :12/06/2008
O R D E R
J.B. Koshy & P.N.Ravindran, JJ.
————————————–
M.A.C.A. No. 616 of 2003
—————————————
Dated this the 12th day of June, 2008
Judgment
Koshy,J.
Appellant/Claimant sustained injuries in a motor
accident on 19.8.1997. He applied for compensation claiming an
amount of Rs.Three lakhs. The tribunal has allowed only
Rs.51,450/-. Only quantum of compensation is disputed in this
appeal. According to the appellant, he was a foreman in a saw mill
and was getting Rs.4,000/- per month. Ext.A10 salary certificate was
produced which shows that he was getting Rs.4,500/- per month.
The tribunal correctly found that the above salary certificate was not
proved. However, he was aged 38 years at the time of accident. He
was maintaining a family. We are of the opinion that at least
Rs.2,500/- can be fixed as the monthly income. As a result of the
accident, his two legs were fractured. Ext.A3 wound certificate
shows that he had fracture of left fibula and condyle of right knee.
Ext.A4 discharge summary shows that he was treated as an
inpatient for 23 days in different hospitals and he had fracture of
right patella and tibia. He was reported for review on nine
M.A.C.A.No.616/2003 2
occasions and thereafter there was follow-up treatment on three
occasions. Ext.A6 disability certificate shows that he had 5%
disability. Ext.A5 medical certificate shows that he had terminal
flexion and extension of the left knee and there is 5% disability.
Doctor also stated that there was mal-union of lateral condyle.
Since doctor was not examined, no compensation was granted by
the tribunal for disability and for loss of earning capacity. We are of
the opinion that the tribunal went wrong in not accepting the above
considering the long treatment and nature of injuries. If that be so,
compensation payable for 5% disability will be Rs.2500 x 12 x 5 x
100
16 = Rs.24,000/-. The tribunal has found that he was unable to go
for work for six months and granted six months’ wages for loss of
earning during the period of treatment. Since we have increased
monthly income to Rs.2,500/-, he is entitled to another Rs.7,500/-.
Thus, he will be entitled an additional amount of Rs.31,500/-. Even
though it is contended that compensation awarded under other
heads are very meagre, considering the total compensation
awarded, we are not enhancing the same. The additional amount of
Rs.31,500/- should be deposited by the third respondent insurance
M.A.C.A.No.616/2003 3
company with 7.5% interest from the date of application till its
deposit over and above the amount decreed by the tribunal.
Appeal is allowed partly.
J.B.Koshy
Judge
P.N.Ravindran
Judge
vaa
M.A.C.A.No.616/2003 4
J.B. KOSHY
AND
P.N.RAVINDRAN,JJ.
————————————-
M.A.C..A. No.616 of 2003
————————————-
Judgment
Dated:12th June, 2008