IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
MACA.No. 2360 of 2008()
1. RAMESH S/O. PARAMESWARAN, AGED 33,
... Petitioner
Vs
1. DAVIS.P.J. PUTHENPURAKKAL HOUSE,
... Respondent
2. GOPINATHAN S/O. SIVAN VELLAPILLY HOUSE,
3. THE MANAGER UNITED INDIA INSURANCE
For Petitioner :SRI.T.N.MANOJ
For Respondent :SRI.NAGARAJ NARAYANAN
The Hon'ble MR. Justice M.N.KRISHNAN
Dated :03/02/2009
O R D E R
M.N. KRISHNAN, J.
= = = = = = = = = = = = = =
M.A.C.A. NO. 2360 OF 2008
= = = = = = = = = = = = = = =
Dated this the 3rd day of February, 2009
J U D G M E N T
This appeal is preferred against the award of the Motor
Accidents Claims Tribunal, Irinjalakuda in O.P.(MV)419/03.
The claimant, a photographer by profession, sustained
injuries in a road accident and he has been awarded a total
compensation of Rs.18,100/-. It is against that decision the
claimant has come up in appeal for enhancement.
2. Heard the counsel for the appellant as well as the
insurance company. A perusal of the award would reveal
that the claimant had sustained a lacerated wound over the
left middle finger with chip fracture of proximal phalanx. He
was initially treated in St. James Hospital. He had also
lacerated wounds over the forehead, tenderness over the
knee. He was initially treated in St. James Hospital.
Chalakkudy. He had also produced a disability certificate to
establish that he has sustained a disability of 9%. The
Tribunal did not consider the disability certificate but
M.A.C.A. 2360 OF 2008
-:2:-
awarded him an amount of Rs.5,000/- for discomforts. I feel
the matter requires reconsideration at the hands of this
Court on the following grounds.
3. Being a photographer by profession and as the
accident had taken place on 7.10.01 considering the
structural income it may not be incorrect to fix the income at
Rs.2,500/- per mensum. When it is so the claimant will be
entitled to two months loss of earnings , i.e., Rs.5,000/- out
of which an amount of Rs.3,000/- is already awarded thereby
entitling him to an additional compensation of Rs.2,000/-.
4. Next is regarding the disability. The Tribunal itself
had clearly noted that the petitioner is not able to bent his
middle finger tip due to the fracture sustained in the accident
and that he has some difficulty functionally. The Tribunal
would opine that it will not affect his earning capacity. When
a finger cannot be bent that too in the profession of
photography even if it is his left hand he has to use his both
hands to handle the camera and he has to do it in different
angles and precision is the fundamental character of a good
photographer which requires strong and capable hands
besides good perception. When there is a physical disability
M.A.C.A. 2360 OF 2008
-:3:-
it may affect the precision and so taking into consideration of
these aspects I am inclined to fix the disability at 4%. For
the age of 33 the multiplier is 17. Thus the loss of earning
power per annum would come to Rs.1,200/- which when
multiplied by 17 would be Rs.20,400/- out of which
Rs.5,000/- already awarded is deducted. Thus the additional
compensation under that head will be Rs.15,400/-. I also
feel an amount of Rs.2,600/- can be awarded to the claimant
towards loss of amenities which makes him entitled to get an
additional compensation of Rs.20,000/-.
In the result the MACA is partly allowed and the
claimant is awarded an additional compensation of
Rs.20,000/- with 7% 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/-