Abdulla vs Sharafudheen T.K
2021 Latest Caselaw 18570 Ker

            IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
                              PRESENT
               THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE T.R.RAVI
  WEDNESDAY, THE 8TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER 2021 / 17TH BHADRA, 1943
                        MACA NO. 239 OF 2012
 AGAINST THE AWARD IN OP(MV) 144/2008 DATED 14.10.2010 OF MOTOR
          ACCIDENT CLAIMS TRIBUNAL VADAKARA, KOZHIKODE
APPELLANT/PETITIONER:

          ABDULLA
          S/O.AMMED, AGED 32 YEARS,
          KIDAVINTE PARAMBATH HOUSE, P.O.KARANDODU,
          (VIA) KUTTIADI, KOZHIKODE DISTRICT, KERALA.
          BY ADV SRI.ZUBAIR PULIKKOOL


RESPONDENTS/RESPONDENTS:

    1     SHARAFUDHEEN T.K.,
          S/O.AMMED MUSLIAR, AGE NOT KNOWN,
          THAZHE KANNOTHU HOUSE, P.O.PULIYAVU,
          PARAKADAVU, KOZHIKODE DISTRICT,
          KERALA, PIN-673001.
          (R.C. OWNER OF MOTOR CYCLE BEARING NO.KL-18/A-1420).
    2     AZEEZ S/O.AMMED MUSLIAR
          AGED 31 YEARS, KANHIPURAYIL THAMASIKKUM,
          NADUKKANDIYIL HOUSE, P.O.ADUKKATH,
          KOZHIKODE DISTRICT, KERALA, PIN-673001.
          (DRIVER OF MOTOR CYCLE BEARING NO.KL-18/A-1420).
    3     NATIONAL INSURANCE COMPANY LIMITED
          BRANCH OFFICE, KEY'S SHOPPING COMPLEX, NARANGAPURAM,
          THALASSERY, KANNUR DISTRICT, KERALA, PIN-670001,
          (INSURER KL-18/A 1420), POLICY
          NO.571102/31/06/6700015159 VALID FROM 31/12/2006 TO
          29/12/2007.
          BY ADV.SRI.E.M.JOSEPH FOR R3
    THIS MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS APPEAL HAVING COME UP
FOR ADMISSION ON 03.09.2021, THE COURT ON 08.09.2021
DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
                                   T.R.RAVI, J.
                     --------------------------------------
                          M.A.C.A.No.239 of 2012
                 -----------------------------------------------
                  Dated this the 8th day of September, 2021

                                JUDGMENT

The appellant met with an accident on 05.08.2007 and sustained

serious injuries, convulsion disorder and amnesia. He claimed a

compensation of Rs.6 lakhs, but the Tribunal granted only

Rs.1,43,720/-. The Medical Board has assessed disability of 40%, but

the Tribunal granted disability only of 20%. It was in these

circumstances that the appellant has filed this appeal.

2. Before this Court the appellant has filed I.A.No.1/2021

producing along with 61 medical bills and prescriptions of Doctor to

support his contention that he is requiring continuous treatment and

that the matter may have to be remanded back for considering the

admissibility of the claim towards future treatment. It is also pointed

out that the Medical Board which assessed the appellant's disability did

not have any Neurosurgeon and hence there was no proper

assessment of the disability, which has reflected in the order of the

Tribunal also.

3. On going through the records, I find that the contention

that there was no Neurosurgeon is correct. As a matter of fact, the

Doctor who was a member of the Medical Board who issued the

disability certificate was examined as CW1 and he had also stated that a Neurosurgeon is required for a proper constitution of the Board.

4. In the above circumstances, the case is remanded back to

the Tribunal for fresh consideration regarding the question relating to

the disability of the appellant and the compensation payable under the

head "permanent disability" and regarding the compensation payable

for future treatment. The appellant and the respondents will be

entitled to adduce additional evidence for the above purpose. The

parties shall appear before the Tribunal on 11.10.2021. The Tribunal

shall endeavour to pass fresh orders in terms of this remand within a

further period of six months from the date of appearance.

Sd/-/-

T.R.RAVI JUDGE dsn