The petitioner in O.P.(M.V.) No.1957 of 2004 of M.A.C.T., Trichur has come up in appeal claiming enhancement of compensation awarded by the M.A.C.T. 2. The appellant, a woman aged 40 years met with an accident and she sustained hematoma 4x4 c.m. on right parietal region, lacerated wound 2x1 c.m. on left big toe and avulsion of toe nail. The X-ray reveals the fracture of distal radius. She was admitted at the hospital on 9.4.2004, i.e., the date of accident, she had undergone treatment as inpatient till 31.4.2004. The plaster was removed on 10.11.2004 and she was advised wrist mobilisation. It seems that she had continued her treatment at Medical College Hospital, Trichur. She had to spent an amount of `3,394/- towards medical treatment. Her disability was assessed as 4.65%.
3. The learned Tribunal has awarded an amount of `5,000/- towards loss of earning, `1,500/- for extra nourishment, `500/- for damage to clothing, `3,394/- towards medical treatment, `2,000/- for bystander expenses, `12,000/- for pain and suffering and `5,000/- for compensation for discomfort, thereby awarded a total amount of `31,000/-.
4. Heard the learned counsel for the appellant. The learned counsel for the appellant contended that the appellant is a coolie worker and even in the absence of any evidence, a no-earning housewife is entitled to get her monthly pension at a rate of `3,000/-. In this particular case, the Tribunal has awarded `5,000/- towards loss of earning for two months by calculating the monthly income at the rate of `2,500/-. When considering the loss of earning for a period of two months, the petitioner/appellant is entitled to get `6,000/-. Towards transportation expenses, an amount of `1,500/- has been awarded. It seems that she had undergone treatment as inpatient for 23 days. Considering the said period, she is entitled to get an amount of `6,900/- towards bystander expenses. It seems that no amount has been awarded towards compensation for disability. It has come out that she has suffered a disability to the tune of 4.65%, as it is evident from Ext.A15. There is no reason to discard Ext.A15. The age of the appellant can be safely considered as 40 at the time of accident, as her O.P. ticket from the Medical College reveals her age as 40. The monthly income of the appellant can be taken as `3,000/-. The multiplier to be applied is 15. Considering the said aspects, it can be concluded that the appellant is entitled to get an amount of `25,110/- towards compensation for disability. It seems that the court below has awarded an amount of `5,000/- towards discomfort. The said amount of compensation is to be granted for .. and permanent disability. Therefore after deducting the amount of `5,000/- granted for discomfort, an amount of `20,110/- has to be granted to the appellant towards compensation for permanent disability. Therefore, over an above, the amount granted as compensation by the M.A.C.T., the appellant is entitled to get an amount of `26,010/-, more as compensation.
In the result, this appeal is allowed in part. An amount of `26,010/- is allowed as compensation to the appellant over and above the amount granted under the impugned award, with an interest at the rate of 8% from 31.7.2004. Third respondent being the insurer, shall pay the said amount within two months from today.
B.KEMAL PASHA, JUDGE dl