High Court Kerala High Court

Sunil vs K.P. Vincent on 5 July, 2007

Kerala High Court
Sunil vs K.P. Vincent on 5 July, 2007
       

  

  

 
 
  IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

MFA No. 934 of 2001()



1. SUNIL
                      ...  Petitioner

                        Vs

1. K.P. VINCENT
                       ...       Respondent

                For Petitioner  :SRI.DILIP J. AKKARA

                For Respondent  :SRI.M.B.PRAJITH

The Hon'ble MR. Justice J.B.KOSHY
The Hon'ble MR. Justice K.P.BALACHANDRAN

 Dated :05/07/2007

 O R D E R

J.B. KOSHY and K.P.BALACHANDRAN, JJ.

—————————-
M.F.A. No. 934 of 2001

—————————-
Dated this the 5th day of July, 2007

Judgment

Koshy, J.

Appellant/Claimant who claims to be a diamond

polisher met with an accident at the age of 25 by which

he sustained serious injuries. According to him, he

sustained the following injuries:

“1. Lacerated wound 6 x 4 c.ms. in
size on the dorsum of left foot close to
the ankle with loss of sin and subcutaneous
tissue exposing bones and tendons.

2. Tendon injury tibials anterior full
cut and common extensor partially cut.

3. Compound chip fracture navicular
bone left foot.

4. Multiple abrations involving right
knee, right foot.

5. Lacerated wound left leg 2 x 0.5
c.ms.”

On 9.3.2000, Dr. K. Soman, Assistant Professor of

Orthopaedics, Medical College Hospital, Thrissur

certified that there is 25% permanent disability. The

doctor was not examined. Therefore, the tribunal did not

M.F.A.No.934/2001 2

accept the above certificate. In many cases where

patients to whom certificates were issued by the same

doctor were referred to the Medical Board by this court

and the Medical Board assessed much lesser percentage of

disability than what is assessed by the same doctor in

almost all cases. The tribunal, who saw the claimant,

found as follows:

“Considering the fact that the injuries
has left an unhealed scar it is only
reasonable to presume that the same would
cause some discomfort to the petitioner.
There is a scar below the left knee and on
the right leg. At the ankle region though
the flap is seen puss is oozing even at
present. Hence I am of the view that he can
be awarded a gross sum for the continuing
discomfort on a rough and ready estimate.
Hence, I am awarding a sum of Rs.20,000/- on
that count.”

The claimant is stated to be working as diamond polisher.

We are of the view that even if the injury is occurred

due to a motor accident, it might not have affected his

earning capacity at all. Further, the accident said to

have been occurred on 24.3.1996. Crime was registered

only on 23.7.1997, after more than one year. Medical

certificates produced are of the year 1997. Even the

M.F.A.No.934/2001 3

accident-cum-wound certificate (Ext.A7) is dated

21.8.1997. Even though there is discomfort, there is no

likelihood of loss of earning capacity considering the

job alleged by him. Hence, we are of opinion that no

enhancement need be granted to him. Appeal is dismissed.

J.B.KOSHY
JUDGE

K.P.BALACHANDRAN
JUDGE

vaa

M.F.A.No.934/2001 4

J.B. KOSHY AND
K.P.BALACHANDRAN, JJ.

————————–

M.F.A.NO.934/2001

————————–

JUDGMENT

Dated:5th July, 2007