High Court Kerala High Court

Ayoob vs Rafeeq on 17 January, 2011

Kerala High Court
Ayoob vs Rafeeq on 17 January, 2011
       

  

  

 
 
  IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

MACA.No. 608 of 2010()


1. AYOOB,S/O.HASSAN,KARIKKUMPARAMBIL HOUSE,
                      ...  Petitioner

                        Vs



1. RAFEEQ,S/O.SULAIMAN,PALLATHUPARA HOUSE,
                       ...       Respondent

2. A.K.SULAIMAN KUTTY,S/O.KOCHUMAKKAR

3. THE NEW INDIA ASSURANCE CO.LTD.,

                For Petitioner  :SRI.UNNIKRISHNAN.V.ALAPATT

                For Respondent  :SRI.A.C.DEVY

The Hon'ble MR. Justice M.N.KRISHNAN

 Dated :17/01/2011

 O R D E R
                M.N. KRISHNAN, J.
           = = = = = = = = = = = = = =
             M.A.C.A. NO. 608 OF 2010
         = = = = = = = = = = = = = = =
     Dated this the 17th day of January, 2011.

                 J U D G M E N T

This appeal is preferred against the award

of the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal,

Thodupuzha in O.P.(MV)465/06. The claimant, a

rider of the motorcycle, sustained injuries in

a road accident when there was a collision

between the motorcycle and a lorry. The

Tribunal on a consideration of the materials

granted a sum of Rs.53,000/- of which

Rs.29,000/- represents medical expenses. It is

against that decision the claimant has come up

in appeal for enhancement.

2. Heard the learned counsel for the

appellant as well as the insurance company. A

perusal of the award would reveal that the

claimant was treated as an inpatient in the

M.A.C.A. 608 OF 2010
-:2:-

hospital from 15.3.06 to 24.3.06. He had

sustained a depressed fracture on the frontal

area besides a fracture on the left radius. In

the radius fracture wire fixation was done. He

was working as a priest in a mosque and the

Tribunal awarded him three months loss of

earnings at the rate of Rs.2,000/- per month.

The Tribunal did not grant him any compensation

for loss of amenities and it is also submitted

that compensation awarded for pain and

sufferings is inadequate. Being a 27 year old

man I feel that the nature of injuries would

have caused him severe problems because of the

frontal bone depressed fracture. He would not

have been in a position to do any job for four

months because of this fracture as well as the

fracture of the radius. Considering the year of

the accident I fix the income at Rs.2,500/- per

M.A.C.A. 608 OF 2010
-:3:-

month and award four months loss of earnings

which comes to Rs.10,000/- out of which

Rs.6,000/- is seen awarded by the Tribunal.

Therefore the claimant is entitled to an

additional compensation of Rs.4,000/- under that

head. Considering the nature, gravity and the

prolonged treatment I am inclined to grant

Rs.2,000/- more towards pain and sufferings. It

is true that no disability certificate is

produced in this case. But it is evident that

there was a depressed fracture on the frontal

bone it has to be elevated and debridement has

to be done. Over and above this, his radius

fracture has resulted in using K wire fixation

and therefore it is certain that this young man

should have suffered serious loss of amenities

and enjoyment in life. So an amount of

Rs.10,000/- is granted under that head. Thus

M.A.C.A. 608 OF 2010
-:4:-

the claimant is granted an additional

compensation of Rs.16,000/-.

In the result the MACA is partly allowed

and the claimant is awarded an additional

compensation of Rs.16,000/- with 7.5% interest

on the said sum from the date of petition till

realisation and the insurance company is

directed to deposit the same within a period of

sixty days from the date of receipt of a copy of

the judgment.

M.N. KRISHNAN, JUDGE.

ul/-