High Court of Kerala
Case Law Search
E. RAMAN v. KUTHUKALLIL IBRAHIM - MFA No. 960 of 2001  RD-KL 2070 (30 January 2007)
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAMMFA No. 960 of 2001()
1. E. RAMAN
1. KUTHUKALLIL IBRAHIM
For Petitioner :SRI.S.V.BALAKRISHNA IYER
For Respondent :SRI.M.JACOB MURICKAN
The Hon'ble MR. Justice M.RAMACHANDRAN The Hon'ble MR. Justice S.SIRI JAGAN
O R D E R
(M.RAMACHANDRAN & S.SIRI JAGAN, JJ)M.F.A.No.960 of 2001-D
Dated this the 30th day of January, 2007
Ramachandran, J:The Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Manjeri, while deciding a claim arising out of a motor accident, which happened on 22-05-1995, had awarded to the claimant in O.P.(MV). No.1578 of 1996 a total compensation of Rs.1,13,000/-. The appellant/petitioner has come up in appeal feeling aggrieved about the adequacy of the award of compensation.
2. The principal submission of the learned counsel for the appellant was that when there were materials to indicate that as a driver he was earning Rs.15.000/- per month in Gulf countries during the relevant time. Tribunal had taken the yardstick for awarding compensation as Rs.3000/- as the monthly earning of the claimant. However, it has to be noticed that apart from producing a certificate there was no steps taken for proving the contents of the document and we find that criticism as against the Tribunal may not lie, since the Tribunal had adopted a realistic stand, by laying down that the average [MFA No.960 of 2001] -2- earnings of a driver is Rs.3000/- per month at least as per the Indian standards. It has also to be noticed that there is nothing to indicate that his profession was as a driver, going by the entries of his Passport, although benefit of doubt has been extended in favour of the claimant.
3. The doctor had certified the disability of the appellant at 4% and on the head of loss of earning power the appellant had been granted Rs.21,500/-; Rs.7000/- towards disability and Rs.25,000/- towards loss of employment.
4. It is difficult for us to accept the contention of the appellant that the income of Rs.15,000/- should have been taken as basis for computation of the compensation, or an enhancement is just or equitable. Evidently the appellant had failed to discharge his part of the duties. Consequently, the appeal will stand dismissed. M.RAMACHANDRAN
( JUDGE)mks/ [MFA No.960 of 2001] -3- M.RAMACHANDRAN, &
S.SIRI JAGAN, JJM.F.A.No. 960 of 2001-D
30th day of January, 2007
Double Click on any word for its dictionary meaning or to get reference material on it.