High Court Kerala High Court

Pradeepam. T.V. vs I.P. Anandan on 25 September, 2008

Kerala High Court
Pradeepam. T.V. vs I.P. Anandan on 25 September, 2008
       

  

  

 
 
  IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

MACA.No. 126 of 2005()


1. PRADEEPAM. T.V., S/O. P.V. DAMODARAN
                      ...  Petitioner

                        Vs



1. I.P. ANANDAN, S/O. NARAYANAN, THETTIYAD,
                       ...       Respondent

2. M. ROHINI, W/O. T.K. BALAN,

3. UNITE INDIA INSURANCE CO.LTD.,

                For Petitioner  :SRI.M.RAMESH CHANDER

                For Respondent  : No Appearance

The Hon'ble MR. Justice C.N.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR
The Hon'ble MR. Justice HARUN-UL-RASHID

 Dated :25/09/2008

 O R D E R
                 C .N. RAMACHANDRAN NAIR &
                      HARUN-UL-RASHID, JJ.
                 --------------------------------------------
                     M.A.C.A. No. 126 OF 2005
                 --------------------------------------------
              Dated this the 25th day of September, 2008

                               JUDGMENT

Ramachandran Nair,J.

Even though appeal remains defective on account of failure to

serve notice on respondent in the delay condonation petition, on going

through the grounds stated in the affidavit in support of the petition, we

are satisfied that appellant has made out sufficient and reasonable

ground to condone the delay. Accordingly delay is condoned. We

don’t think there is any need to issue fresh notice because insurer is

held liable to pay compensation and they have not filed appeal against

the award. Therefore it is only a matter of considering increase of

compensation that too marginally. Therefore we proceed to dispose of

the appeal without issuing fresh notice.

2. On going through the award and after hearing counsel for the

appellant, we feel some modification is called for because even though

appellant has not sustained any serious disability, he had to undergo

2

treatment for the leg injury in the hospital as an inpatient for 20 days.

His income fixed is only at Rs. 1200/- per month for the purpose of

award of compenstion under loss of earning power. Considering the

grounds raised we feel a lumpsum additional compensation will serve

the ends of justice. We accordingly increase the total compensation

from Rs. 36,200/- to Rs. 50,000/- with direction to the insurance

company to deposit additional compensation amount with interest at

7.5 per cent per annum from the date of application till date of deposit.

Appeal is disposed of as above.

(C.N.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR)
Judge.

(HARUN-UL-RASHID)
Judge.

kk

3