MANUKUTTAN, Vs. MOIDEEN HAJI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE petitioner, who is the injured in O.P(MV) No. 3735/2002 on the file of the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Kozhikode, is the appellant herein. He met with a road traffic accident on 17..9..2002, hit by a mini lorry owned by the 1st respondent, driven by the 2nd respondent and insured with the 3rd respondent. He sustained patella fracture and also 1 and 3 rips fracture. He underwent treatment and sustained disability and claimed a total compensation of Rs. 2 lakhs. This was opposed by the 3rd respondent by filing written statement. After evaluation of the evidence, the Tribunal found that the accident occurred due to the negligence of the driver of the lorry and awarded compensation as follows:

(2.) HEARD counsel for the appellant and counsel for the Insurance Company.

(3.) IT is an admitted fact that the appellant sustained comminutted fracture to the left patella and fracture ribs 1 and 3. He was treated as in-patient on three occasions. He was examined by the medical board and the medical board has assessed 20% disability. But, unfortunately, nature of the disability and present inconvenience caused to the appellant on account of the disability has not been mentioned in the certificate. So, the lower court was perfectly justified in not accepting the disability assessed by the medical board and took correctly 10% as disability, which we accept as correct.