IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE J.B.KOSHY & THE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE K.HEMA MONDAY, THE 7TH APRIL 2008 / 18TH CHAITHRA 1930 MACA.No. 506 of 2003() ---------------------- OPMV.889/1998 of MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS TRIBUNAL, KASARAGOD .................... APPELLANT/PETITIONER. -------------------------------------- UMMALIMA, W/O.MOIDEENKUTTY, AGED 40 YEARS, ICHILANGODE VILLAGE & POST, INCHILANGODE, KASARAGOD DISTRICT.& TALUK. BY ADV. SMT.R.PADMAKUMARI RESPONDENTS: RESPONDENTS. ------------------------- 1. SHEIKALI, S/O.MOIDEEN KUNHI, MOIDEEN MAHAL, CHOWKI, KUNDLU VILLAGE, KASARAGOD TALUK. 2. P.K.MOHAMMED, S/O.P.K.MOOSA, SAMAK REATAURANT, KUNNIL COMPOUND, BENDOOR WELL, MANGALAORE, DHAKSHINA KANNADA, KARNATAKA STATE. 3. BRANCH MANAGER, NATIONAL INSURANCE COMPANY, BENDICHAL SHOPPING ARCADE, KASARAGOD TOWN, PO.KASARAGOD, KASARAGOD TALUK AND DISTRICT. R3 BY ADV. SRI.MATHEWS JACOB (Sr.) THIS MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS APPEAL HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 07/04/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: J.B.KOSHY & K.HEMA, JJ. -------------------------------------- M.A.C.A.No.506 OF 2003 ------------------------------------- Dated 7th April, 2008 JUDGMENT Koshy,J . Appellant/claimant sustained serious injuries in a motor accident on 27.7.1998. She claimed a compensation of Rs.5,00,000/=. Tribunal awarded Rs.1,03,988/- and third respondent insurance company which insured the offending vehicle was directed to deposit the amount. Only dispute is regarding the quantum of compensation. According to the appellant, she was aged 41 at the time of accident. Tribunal has fixed 15 as the multiplier. We see no ground to change the multiplier fixed by the Tribunal taking guidelines from the second schedule. 2. With regard to the income, according to the appellant, she was a beedi roller getting Rs.3,000/= as monthly income. Tribunal fixed Rs.1,200/= as the notional income in the absence of evidence. Even for a non-earning person notional income is fixed as Rs.1,250/= per month (Rs.15,000/= per year) in the second schedule. Services rendered by a house wife also cannot be discarded. Considering all these factors, we are of the opinion that at least Rs.1,800/= ought to have been fixed as the monthly income. The following are the injuries sustained by the MACA.506/2003 2 appellant as can be seen from the wound certificate: “1. Fracture tibia (right) 2. Fracture Femur (right) 3. Lacerated wound on the outer surface foot 5cm. Long. 4. Crush injury to finger of right foot 3rd and 4th finger. 5. Lacerated wound over left leg knee. 6. Lacerated wound first toe. 7. Ultra sound – laceration 12.5cm right lobe of liver inferiorly.” Medical Board assessed the disability of the appellant as 40%, but, Tribunal assessed the same as 15%. The Medical Board also found that her right leg was shortened by few inches and there was difficulty in movement of knee. Since there is fracture of tibia, fracture of femur and crush injury to 3rd and 4th fingers of the right foot, we are of the opinion that compensation should have been calculated at least for 20% disability. Tribunal found that she was under treatment for three months. She was inpatient in the hospital for 61 days. Considering the injuries and fractures suffered, Tribunal ought to have granted loss of earnings for four months as she was unable to do any work for four months. Therefore, actual loss of earnings payable will be Rs.7,200/= (Rs.1,800 x 4). Tribunal has awarded only Rs.3,600/=. Hence, the claimant will be entitled to an MACA.506/2003 3 additional amount of Rs.3,600/= on that count. It is submitted that only Rs.4,000/= was awarded for transportation and bystander's expenses. In the absence of any details, we are not inclined to increase the same. With regard to the medical expenses, even though the amount claimed was very high, after considering the bills produced, Tribunal awarded Rs.64,388/=. We see no ground to change the same as medical bills were reimbursed. Rs.15,000/= was awarded for pain and suffering. We see no ground to interfere with the same. Now, the question is what is the amount to be paid for loss of earning power and other consequences of disability including loss of amenities. We have already found that the monthly income can be assessed as Rs.1,800/=, 20% as the loss of earning capacity and 15 is taken as the multiplier. Then the compensation payable for permanent disability and loss of earning power will be Rs. 64,800/= (1,800 x 12 x 15 x 20 ). Tribunal awarded only Rs.27,000/=. 100 Therefore, the appellant will be entitled to an additional amount of Rs.37,800/= under that head. Tribunal deducted Rs.10,000/= merely because in an earlier accident regarding the clavicle fracture Rs.17,000/= was awarded. We see no ground for deducting the same. Therefore, total additional compensation payable will be Rs.51,400/=. The above amount of Rs.51,400/= should be deposited by the third respondent insurance company with 7.5% interest from the date of MACA.506/2003 4 application till its deposit. On deposit of the amount, appellant is allowed to withdraw the same. The appeal is partly allowed. J.B.KOSHY JUDGE K.HEMA JUDGE tks