High Court Kerala High Court

C.A.Gopi vs K.S.Suresh Kumar on 31 October, 2008

Kerala High Court
C.A.Gopi vs K.S.Suresh Kumar on 31 October, 2008
       

  

  

 
 
  IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

MACA.No. 1404 of 2004()


1. C.A.GOPI, AGED 48, S/O.APPU,
                      ...  Petitioner

                        Vs



1. K.S.SURESH KUMAR, S/O. SAKARAN,
                       ...       Respondent

2. UNITED INDIA INSURANCE COMPAY LTD.,

                For Petitioner  :SRI.K.S.MADHUSOODANAN

                For Respondent  :SRI.PMM.NAJEEB KHAN

The Hon'ble MR. Justice J.B.KOSHY
The Hon'ble MR. Justice K.P.BALACHANDRAN

 Dated :31/10/2008

 O R D E R
                 J.B.KOSHY & K.P.BALACHANDRAN, JJ.
                         --------------------------------------
                        M.A.C.A.No.1404 OF 2004
                          -------------------------------------
                         Dated 31st October, 2008

                                  JUDGMENT

Koshy,J.

Appellant/claimant sustained serious injuries in a motor

accident on 11.4.2000. Against a claim of Rs.1,70,000/=, the Tribunal

awarded only Rs.60,250/= inclusive of reimbursement of medical

expenses. The appellant produced disability certificate assessing 20%

disability issued by the Medical Board. The above certificate reads as

follows:

“This is to certify that we, the members of
the Special Medical Board have examined
Sri.C.A.Gopi, aged 47 yrs, S/o.Appu,
Chirattapurackal, Veliyathamparambu,
Nayarambalam, whose signature is given above,
on 21.04.2003 and have reached the following
conclusions. As per the discharge summary (OP
No:119757 – IP No:46896) issued from the
Modern Hospital, Kodungallur Ltd., Kodungallur,
Sri.C.A.Gopi met with a road traffic accident at
7.30 P.M. on 11.04.2000 and was referred from
Don Bosco Hospital, Paravoor on 11.04.2000 and
was referred from Don Bosco Hospital, Paravoor
on 11.04.2000 for the management of
intracranial injury. He had sudden loss of
consciousness, regained consciousness and
became disoriented. C.T. Scan revealed 1.
Fracture (Rt) temporal bone 2. (Lt) inferior
frontal haemorrhagic contusion and thin frontal
acute sub arachnoid haemorrhage (SDH) 3. Rt.

MACA.1404/2004 2

posterior temporal lobe confusion and thin
SDH. 4. Small punctuate bleeds in the
internal capsule (Rt) side and 5. Brain
oedema. He was admitted in the
Neurosurgery Department from 11.04.2000
to 22.04.2000. On discharge, he was
conscious, oriented with no neurological
deficit and was advised to continue
anticonvulsant Eptoin with regular follow up.
After discharge, the patient used to get
attacks of headache, giddiness, impaired
memory and convulsions on and off. As per
the certificate dated 05.10.2000, issued by
Dr.Thomas Vargheese, M.S.M.Ch., Consultant
Neurosurgeon, Little Flower Hospital &
Research Centre, Angamaly he was under
follow up treatment for head injury sequelae
which interfered with his routine work and
social well-being. Since he has the
Psychoneurotic state (as sequelae of head
injury) of extended, persistent symptoms,
enforcement of continued adjustment of
employment relations of moderate adjustment
required, his disability is assessed to be 20%
(Twenty percent).”

According to the appellant, even though the above certificate was

produced and marked as Ext.A8, it was not considered and the

Tribunal awarded only Rs.10,000/= for permanent disability. We note

that Rs.10,000/= was awarded for disability and another Rs.10,000/=

for loss of amenities . Rs.2,500/= was awarded for disfiguration and

Rs.20,000/= was awarded for pain and suffering. Since the

certificate issued by the medical board was not proved, we are of the

opinion that the Tribunal has given ample reasons for not accepting

MACA.1404/2004 3

the above assessment. However, considering the injuries suffered,

we award an amount of Rs.7,000/= more than that was awarded by

the Tribunal. The above amount of Rs.7,000/= should be deposited

by the third respondent insurance company with 7.5% interest from

the date of application till its deposit, over and above the amount

decreed by the Tribunal. On deposit of the amount, the appellant is

allowed to withdraw the same.

The appeal is partly allowed.

J.B.KOSHY
JUDGE

K.P.BALACHANDRAN
JUDGE

tks