Ramachandran Nair, J. The limited question raised in this appeal is whether the compensation granted is inadequate. The accident occurred on 02.03.2004 while the appellant was travelling as a pillion rider in a motorcycle bearing Reg.No.KL-8/Y 6722 on being hit by a car bearing Reg.No.KL-2/R 3259 at a place called KMML Factory at Chavara. He fell down from the motor cycle and sustained the following injuries:
“Contusion upper 1/4th right forearm, multiple abrasions left hand, laceration with abrasion over right ankle, medial malleolus right ankle, fracture fibula right, avulsion fracture greater tuberosity right humerus.”
2. He was admitted in the Unity Orthopaedic Centre, Karunagappally and was treated as an inpatient from 2.3.2004 to 12.3.2004. He had undergone open reduction and internal fixation of medial mallelous with `K' wires on 2.3.2004 and shoulder immobilization. According to the appellant, he was treated as an outpatient for a long period of time.
3. The learned counsel mainly raised two arguments before us; one is that the business income of the appellant has not been reckoned in full as against his claim for Rs.7,000/-, and the Tribunal has taken Rs.3,000/- as his income. Secondly it is submitted that the compensation for pain and suffering is inadequate.
4. The Tribunal has assessed the compensation in the following manner:
5. The discussion of the evidence shows that Rs.3,000/- was reckoned as the income. Even though no disability certificate was produced, 5% disability has been taken for assessing disability compensation and Rs.27,000/-
has been assessed for the same. The learned counsel for the respondent Insurance Company submitted that without producing proper medical certificates or at least a disability certificate, the assessment of compensation for permanent disability is on a higher side.
6. Even though the learned counsel for the appellant submitted that the business income at Rs.7,000/- should have been reckoned, we find no reason to agree with the same, since there is no evidence for the same and the burden is on the applicant to prove it.
7. The Tribunal has assessed the total compensation as Rs.72,000/-. For pain and suffering Rs.15,000/- is granted. It is seen that he was an inpatient for 10 days in a hospital and had undergone various procedures and treatment. Therefore, we will be justified in granting an amount of Rs.25,000/- for pain and suffering. Apart from the same, for bystander's expenses, we grant an amount of Rs.2,000/-. In that view of the matter, the total compensation would be Rs.83,000/- (Rupees Eighty three thousand only), which will carry 9% interest per annum. All the other directions of the Tribunal are upheld.
The appeal is allowed to that extent. No costs.
Sd/-
T.R.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR Judge rtr/ Sd/-
P.V.ASHA Judge /true copy/ P.S to Judge