Somasundaran vs Antu P.K. on 10 November, 2010

       

  

  

 
 
  IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

MACA.No. 588 of 2010()


1. SOMASUNDARAN, S/O.RAMAN NAIR,
                      ...  Petitioner

                        Vs



1. ANTU P.K., S/O.KUNJUVAREED,
                       ...       Respondent

2. CHOLAMANDALAM  M/S. GENERAL INSURANCE

                For Petitioner  :SRI.P.V.BABY

                For Respondent  :SRI.MATHEWS JACOB (SR.)

The Hon'ble MR. Justice M.N.KRISHNAN

 Dated :10/11/2010

 O R D E R
                      M.N. KRISHNAN, J.
                = = = = = = = = = = = = = =
                  M.A.C.A. NO. 588 OF 2010
              = = = = = = = = = = = = = = =
       Dated this the 10th day of November, 2010.

                        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)

833/06. The Tribunal awarded him a compensation of

Rs.52,200/- and exonerated the insurance company from the

liability and directed the owner cum rider to pay the amount.

It is against that decision the claimant has come up in appeal

for enhancement.

2. Heard the learned counsel for all the sides. So far

as the breach of policy conditions are concerned it is seen

that the driver did not have a valid driving licence on the

date of accident. The driving licence was not even renewed

after the statutory period of 30 days and therefore the said

finding cannot be found fault with.

3. Now regarding the adequacy of compensation. It

is seen that the claimant has suffered a trimalleolar fracture

with subluxation of the left angle. The Tribunal has granted

M.A.C.A. 588 OF 2010
-:2:-

him the actual compensation for medical expenses and

Rs.5,000/- for loss of amenities, Rs.5,000/- for the

disfigurement mark and other expenses. The Tribunal did not

accept the disability certificate. The Tribunal has noted that

there was nothing visible by way of any physical disability

affecting the petitioner’s earning capacity or normal physical

conditions. The claimant did not attempt to prove the

disability certificate especially when he claims a limb

disability of 17%. Taking into consideration the over all

materials the compensation awarded appears to be just and

adequate and therefore the appeal fails and the same is

dismissed.

M.N. KRISHNAN, JUDGE.

ul/-