Kuttikattil Jenil vs New India Assurance Company Ltd on 19 June, 2009

       

  

  

 
 
  IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

MACA.No. 835 of 2005(K)


1. KUTTIKATTIL JENIL,A GED 13 YEARS(MINOR),
                      ...  Petitioner

                        Vs



1. NEW INDIA ASSURANCE COMPANY LTD.,
                       ...       Respondent

                For Petitioner  :SRI.GRASHIOUS KURIAKOSE

                For Respondent  :SRI.P.G.GANAPPAN

The Hon'ble MR. Justice K.M.JOSEPH
The Hon'ble MR. Justice M.L.JOSEPH FRANCIS

 Dated :19/06/2009

 O R D E R
       K. M. JOSEPH & M. L. JOSEPH FRANCIS, JJ.
                - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
                    M.A.C.A.NO: 835 OF 2005
                - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
              Dated this the 19th Day of June, 2009.

                              JUDGMENT

Joseph J.

The claimant in a petition filed under Section 166 of the

Motor Vehicles Act, is the appellant. He has been awarded

Rs.85,000/-

2. Heard the learned counsel for the appellant and the

learned counsel appearing on behalf of the respondent, Insurance

Company.

3. The appellant is a boy, aged 7 years at the time of

accident. He suffered various injuries. This appeal is directed

against the inadequacy of quantum. Learned counsel for the

appellant would submit that actually the grievance is that no

amount is awarded towards future treatment. He would submit

that as a result of the injuries suffered, appellant had to undergo

treatment and the treatment is even now going on, and there are

records to show the same also. Learned counsel for the Insurance

Company would submit that there is no specific pleading as such.

M.A.C.A.NO: 835 OF 2005
: 2 :

But it is noted that no amount was awarded towards future

medical treatment. It is settled law, that when an accident takes

place, there cannot be successive awards for compensation and all

the claims must be dealt with in the same award. Learned counsel

for appellant essentially seeks for a remand. We would think that

in the facts of this case, the appellant should be afforded an

opportunity to make good his claim. Accordingly, the appeal is

allowed and the matter is remanded back to the Tribunal with

opportunity to the parties to adduce fresh evidence.

4. The parties shall appear before the Tribunal on

10.8.2009. In view of the fact that the matter is pending from 1998,

the Tribunal will dispose of the case, as early as possible, at any

rate, within four months from 10.8.2009.

K.M.JOSEPH, JUDGE.

M. L. JOSEPH FRANCIS, JUDGE.

dl/