IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
MACA.No. 786 of 2003()
1. SANKARAN, AGED 22, S/O.K.PON RAJ,
... Petitioner
Vs
1. C.K.BAIJU, AGED 34,
... Respondent
2. THE BRANCH MANAGER, NEW INDIA ASSURANCE
For Petitioner :SRI.T.KURIAKOSE PETER
For Respondent :SRI.A.C.DEVY
The Hon'ble MR. Justice J.B.KOSHY
The Hon'ble MR. Justice THOMAS P.JOSEPH
Dated :18/08/2008
O R D E R
J.B. Koshy & Thomas P. Joseph, JJ.
————————————–
M.A.C.A. No. 786 of 2003
—————————————
Dated this the 18th day of August, 2008
Judgment
Koshy,J.
Appellant claimant, at the age of 11, sustained injuries
in a motor accident. He claimed compensation of Rs.2,50,000/-.
The application for compensation before the Motor Accidents Claims
Tribunal was presented through the guardian alleging that the
accident occurred due to the negligence of the first respondent
driver-cum-owner of the autorickshaw insured by the second
respondent insurance company. The negligence of the first
respondent and coverage of insurance of the offending vehicle by
the second respondent insurance company was found by the
Tribunal, but, only Rs.15,700/- was awarded by the Tribunal. Only
quantum of compensation is disputed in this appeal.
2. Ext.A4 is the wound certificate. Ext.A6 is the scan
report. Ext.A7 is the index card. Ext.A8 series are the referral OP
tickets and Ext.A12 are the x-rays. The Tribunal found as follows:
“A perusal of the said documents would go
to show that in the accident, the petitioner has
sustained the following injuries:W.A.Nos. 1273, 1274 & 1277/2003 2
‘Compound fracture right leg. Left
sided haemorrhagic contusion in frontal
lobe. Left sided subdurall haematoma at
tempero frontal left region. Fracture left
temporal bone’The said documents would further go to show
that the petitioner was treated in the Medical
College Hospital as an inpatient for a period of
25 days.”
3. Other contentions of the petitioner are that even
though he produced Ext.A5 disability certificate assessing 30%
permanent disability, the Tribunal did not award any compensation
for permanent disability and loss of earning power. It is submitted
that he lost his studies and his life became miserable due to the
accident. The medical certificate shows that as a result of the
injuries he had mal-united fracture and arthritis. There is
behavioural abnormalities and headache and the above disabilities
are permanent. The reason for not accepting the medical certificate
is that the doctor was not examined even though proceedings are in
summary nature and the documents were marked by consent and
other x-rays, wound certificate etc. are accepted by the Tribunal.
Considering the nature of injuries and considering Ext.A5 , we are of
opinion that compensation can be awarded at least for 20%
disability. The claimant was only a student. So, only notional
W.A.Nos. 1273, 1274 & 1277/2003 3
income can be taken for the purpose of calculation. Therefore,
compensation payable will be Rs.15,000/- x 15 x 15 =
100
Rs.33,750/-. The Tribunal did not award any compensation for
permanent disability, loss of earning power or for other consequent
disability. Therefore, claimant is entitled to Rs.33,750/- more than
that is decreed by the Tribunal. The above amount of Rs.33,750/-
should be deposited by the second respondent insurance company
with 7.5% interest from the date of application till its deposit. Since
the accident occurred in 1994, on deposit of the amount, claimant is
allowed to withdraw the same.
J.B.Koshy
Judge
Thomas P. Joseph
Judge
vaa
W.A.Nos. 1273, 1274 & 1277/2003 4
J.B. KOSHY
AND
THOMAS P.JOSEPH,JJ.
————————————-
M.A.C.A. No.786/2003
————————————-
Judgment
Dated:18th August, 2008