GEORGE LAZAR, S/O.CHEMBAKASSERY Vs. THOMAS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) M .A.C.A. No. 1298 of 2008 is filed by the owner of a car, alleged negligent driving of which gave rise to O.P. (M.V.) No. 657 of 2003 before the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Irinjalakuda, filed by the appellant in M.A.C.A. No. 1943 of 2009. The Tribunal found negligence on the part of the driver of the vehicle and awarded compensation to the appellant in M.A.C.A. No. 1943 of 2009. The owner of the vehicle has filed M.A.C.A.No. 1298 of 2008, challenging the finding regarding negligence on the part of the driver of his vehicle. M.A.C.A.No. 1943 of 2008 is filed by the claimant seeking enhanced compensation.

(2.) AS far as, M.A.C.A. No. 1298 of 2008 is concerned, in the same, a Bench of this court had as early as on 25th July 2008 passed the following order:

(3.) WE have considered the contention of the parties. The appellant did not produce any acceptable evidence to prove his income. The accident was on 6-4-2002. In the above circumstances, fixation of monthly income of Rs. 2,000/- does not appear to be incorrect. We also feel that under all heads considered by the Tribunal, the Tribunal has awarded just and reasonable compensation. But the Tribunal, simply because of the fact that during cross-examination the appellant admitted that he came climbing stairs to the court several times, it cannot be believed that he had suffered any disability. We are not satisfied that that is a good reason to deny claim for loss of earning capacity on account of disability certified by the doctor. The person having 4% disability can also climb stairs and come to the Tribunal. But that need not be as efficiently or fastly as a person who did not suffer any disability. The appellant has suffered fracture of the shaft of left femur, comminuted fracture of the left patella and multiple scalp wounds. Because of the comminuted fracture of the left patella it is reasonable to assume that the appellant would have suffered 4% disability. Therefore, even though the appellant had not proved Ext.A2 disability certificate by examining the doctor who issued the same, we are inclined to adopt the same for the purpose of calculating loss of earning capacity of the appellant. Accordingly, under the head loss of earning capacity the appellant would be entitled to Rs.12,480/- (2000x12x13x4/100) as compensation for permanent loss of earning power. This will be in addition to the compensation already awarded by the Tribunal. The said amount would carry interest at the rate of 9% per annum from the date of the claim petition till date of payment. The respondent is directed to pay that amount also along with the amounts awarded by the Tribunal within two months. Accordingly, M.A.C.A. No. 1298 of 2008 is dismissed and M.A.C.A. 1943 of 2009 is disposed of as above.