RAGESH Vs. FRANK JOHN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner is the claimant in O.P.(MV) No. 387 of 2017 on the files of the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Ernakulam. The accident happened on 29/11/2015. The petitioner made Ext. P2 application dtd. 16/1/2020 before the Tribunal under Rule 387 of the Kerala Motor Vehicles Rules, 1989 ('Rules', for short) for his examination by a Medical Board constituted at District Hospital, Ernakulam for issuance of disability certificate. Pursuant to the orders passed by the Tribunal, the petitioner appeared before the Special Medical Board at General Hospital, Ernakulam and he was issued with Ext.P3 certificate dtd. 22/12/2021 certifying his whole body permanent disability as 5%. According to the petitioner, though Ext.P3 disability certificate is signed by three Doctors, only one Doctor had examined him and that Ext.P3 does not indicate his actual disability. Accordingly, the petitioner filed Ext.P4 application dtd. 10/6/2022 to refer him for further medical examination by the Medical Board constituted at Medical College, Ernakulam.

(2.) The Tribunal rejected Ext.P4 application by Ext.P5 order dtd. 24/6/2022 holding that Ext.P3 disability certificate is signed by three Doctors and therefore the contention of the petitioner that he was examined only by one Doctor cannot be believed. The Tribunal observed that the petitioner has only orthopedic disability and the prayer to refer him for further medical examination cannot be allowed and dismissed the petition with liberty to the petitioner to examine any of the signatories to Ext.P3 certificate.

(3.) The Tribunal had allowed the application of the petitioner under Rule 387 of the Rules for examination by Medical Board and he appeared before the Medical Board and Ext.P3 certificate is issued indicating his whole body permanent disability. The petitioner contends that Ext.P3 does not indicate his actual disability and prays for further examination by Medical Board constituted at Medical College, Ernakulam. The standard for awarding compensation on the basis of disability has been laid down by the Apex Court in Raj Kumar v. Ajay Kumar [(2011) 1 SCC 343].