IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE A.K.BASHEER & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.Q.BARKATH ALI THURSDAY, THE 17TH MARCH 2011 / 26TH PHALGUNA 1932 MACA.No. 1023 of 2004() ---------------------------------- OPMV.2006/1997 of MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS TRIBUNAL, ALAPPUZHA .................... APPELLANT(S): APPELLANT: ----------------------------------------- RAMACHANDRAN @ THANKAPPAN, S/O. PADMANABHAN, PULIMTHURUTHU VEEDU, THANNEERMUKKOM P.O., CHERTHALA. BY ADVS. SRI.T.B.SARASAN SRI.M.V.BAIJU RESPONDENT(S): ------------------------ 1. K.RAJAGOPAL, ASWATHY, HOUSE NO.601/VI, THANNEERMUKKOM POST, CHERTHALA. 2. THE UNITED INDIA INSURANCE CO. LTD., REPRESENTED BY ITS BRANCH MANAGER, CHERTHALA. R2 BY ADV. SMT.RAJI T.BHASKAR THIS MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS APPEAL HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 17/03/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: tss A.K.BASHEER & P.Q. BARKATH ALI, JJ. =~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~==~=~=~= M.A.C.A. No. 1023 OF 2004 =~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~==~=~=~= Dated this the 17th day of March, 2011 JUDGMENT Barkath Ali, J. Appellant is the claimant in O.P.(MV) No.2006/97on the file of the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Alappuzha. In this appeal he challenges the judgment and award of the Tribunal dated June 27, 2003 awarding a compensation of Rs.33,500/- for the loss caused to him on account of the injuries sustained by him in a motor accident. 2. The accident happened on August 8, 1997 at 3.45 p.m. on the Alappuzha – Thanneermukkom road near Punnachuvadu at Cherthala. While the claimant was cycling along the side of the Alappuzha – Thanneermukkom road, he was knocked down by a scooter driven by the first respondent. He sustained the following injuries:- 1) An incised wound of 4 cm. x ½ cm. x ½ cm. 2) Perionlental edema of (R) eye. MACA 1023/2004 2 3) Another incised wound of 4 cm. x 2 cm. x 1 cm. size face below the (R) eye. 4) A lacerated wound of 2 cm. x 1 cm. x 1 cm. dorsal aspect of (L) 2nd finger. 5) Compound fracture of maxilla (R) with displacement.” Alleging negligence against the first respondent, the claimant filed the O.P. before the Tribunal under section 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act claiming a compensation of Rs.2 lakhs. 3. The first respondent, owner-cum-rider of the scooter, remained absent and he was set ex parte by the Tribunal. The second respondent, the insurer of the offending scooter, filed a written statement admitting the policy, but attributed negligence to the claimant. The claimant was examined as PW1 and Exts.A1 to A9 series were marked on the side of the claimant. No evidence was adduced by the contesting second respondent. On an appreciation of the evidence, the Tribunal found that the accident occurred due to negligence of first respondent MACA 1023/2004 3 rider of the scooter and awarded a compensation of Rs. 33,500/- with interest @ 6% p.a. from the date of petition till realization and cost of Rs.300/-. The claimant has come up in appeal challenging the quantum of compensation awarded by the Tribunal. 4. Heard the counsel for the claimant and the counsel for the Insurance Company. 5. The accident is not disputed. The finding of the Tribunal that the accident occurred due to the negligence of the first respondent, rider of the scooter, is not seriously challenged in this appeal. Therefore, the only question, which arises for consideration, is whether the claimant is entitled to any enhanced compensation. 6. The Tribunal awarded a total compensation of Rs.33,500/-. Break up of the compensation awarded is as under:- Loss of earning : Rs. 7,500 Treatment, medicine, : Rs. 4,000 transportation and other expenses. Pain and suffering : Rs. 10,000 MACA 1023/2004 4 Discomfort, inconvenience and : Rs. 12,000 loss of amenities. ------------------ Total : Rs.33,500 ======= 7. The counsel for the claimant argued that no compensation was awarded by the Tribunal for the disability caused. He sought enhancement of compensation for pain and suffering and on other heads. 8. In Ext.A7 the treatment certificate the doctor has certified that the claimant has permanent disability of 40%. It is also stated that he had suffered a fractured maxilla (Right side), which was displaced. Taking into consideration the above aspects, we feel that a compensation of Rs.20,000/- would be reasonable for the disability caused to the claimant. 9. The Tribunal awarded interest only @ 6% per annum, which appears to be very low. The claimant is entitled to interest @ 7.5% per annum from the date of petition till realization for the compensation already awarded by the Tribunal and also for the enhanced MACA 1023/2004 5 compensation. As regards the compensation awarded under other heads, we find the same to be reasonable and therefore, we are not disturbing the same. 10. In the result, the claimant is found entitled to an additional compensation of Rs.20,000/- He is entitled to interest @ 7.5% per annum from the date of petition till realization for the compensation already awarded and also for the enhanced compensation. The second respondent being the insurer of the offending vehicle shall deposit the amount within two months from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment with notice to the claimant. The award of the Tribunal is modified to the above extent. The appeal is disposed of as found above. A.K.BASHEER, JUDGE. P.Q. BARKATH ALI, JUDGE. mn