IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE R.BASANT & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE N.K.BALAKRISHNAN TUESDAY, THE 26TH JULY 2011 / 4TH SRAVANA 1933 MACA.No. 651 of 2011() ---------------------------------- OP(MV)NO.741/2003 of MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS TRIBUNAL, THODUPUZHA .................... APPELLANT/ CLAIMANT ------------------------------------ SIJU P.NAIR, S/O.PARAMESWARAN NAIR, KALARIKUDIYIL(H), AVOLI KARA, DO. VILLAGE, MUVATTUPUZHA. BY ADV. SRI.N.ANILKUMAR RESPONDENT/RESPONDENTS --------------------------------------------- 1. RONY THOMAS, EDAPAZHATHIL (H), ANCHIRI KARA, ALACODE VILLAGE. 2. BINISH, CHOLLAKUNNEL(H), ENANELLOOR KARA, AVOLI VILLAGE, MUVATTUPUZHA TALUK. 3. UNITED INDIA INSURANCE CO. LTD., THODUPUZHA. R3 BY ADV. SMT.R.REMA THIS MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS APPEAL HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 26/07/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: sts R.BASANT & N.K.BALAKRISHNAN, JJ. ----------------------------------------- C.M.App.No.1069 OF 2011 & M.A.C.A No.651 OF 2011 ---------------------------------------- Dated this the 26th day of July, 2011 ORDER/JUDGMENT BASANT,J. C.M.App.No.1069 OF 2011: This petition is to condone the delay of 183 days in filing the appeal. There is no appearance for the respondent. We take a lenient view. Petition allowed. Delay condoned. M.A.C.A No.651 OF 2011: 2. Claimant is the appellant. He claimed compensation for personal injuries suffered by him in a motor accident which took place on 21.6.2003. Against the claim of Rs.1,50,000/- the Tribunal awarded an amount of Rs.62,895/- as per the details given below though the total work out to Rs.64,895/-: 1. Loss of earning : Rs.8,000/-(2000x4) 2. Loss of damages to clothing : Rs.250/- 3. Transportation expense : Rs.250/- 4. Extra nourishment : Rs 500/- C.M.App.No.1069 OF 2011 & M.A.C.A No.651 OF 2011 2 5. Medical treatment expense : Rs.36,995/- 6. Bystander expense : Rs. 3,900/- 7.Pain and suffering, continuing inconvenience, loss of amenities and enjoyment of life : Rs. 15,000/- ----------------- Rs.64,895/- ========== 3. The appellant claims to be aggrieved by the impugned award. Reasonable and adequate compensation has not been awarded, complains the learned counsel for the appellant. 4. Called upon to be most specific and precise the learned counsel for the appellant submits that the amount awarded under the head of loss of earnings is unrealistic. The appellant a young man aged about 25 years was employed as Manager in a finance company and was earning an income of Rs.5,000/- per mensem. He had produced Ext A8 salary certificate in support of this contention. The tribunal though it accepted that the appellant must have been involuntarily unemployed for a period of 4 months awarded only an amount of Rs.8,000/- as compensation reckoning the monthly income to be Rs.2,000/-. This is grossly inadequate, it is contended. C.M.App.No.1069 OF 2011 & M.A.C.A No.651 OF 2011 3 5. It is further contended that the appellant was an inpatient for a period of 39 days, the Tribunal had accepted the same as can be seen from the award of Rs.3,900/-(39x100) as compensation for bystanders expense. He had suffered communited fracture of left tibia also. In these circumstances the amount awarded under the head of pain and suffering is too inadequate, contends the counsel. The learned counsel contends that the trauma suffered in the accident has impaired the quality of life of the appellant, though the appellant is unable to produce precise material to show the quantification of physical disability. At any rate a reasonable amount must been awarded under the head of pain and suffering, submits the learned counsel. 6. The learned counsel further submits that the Tribunal committed an arithmetical error in ascertaining the total amount payable. The amount awarded actually comes to a total of Rs.64,895/- whereas the Tribunal had directed payment of only Rs.62,895/-. In these circumstances, the amount awarded may be enhanced, it is contended. 7. We find it easy to conclude even in the absence of better evidence that the appellant must have been earning an amount of C.M.App.No.1069 OF 2011 & M.A.C.A No.651 OF 2011 4 Rs.3,500/- per mensem. We are further satisfied that a higher amount of compensation deserves to be awarded under the composite head of pain and suffering and loss of amenities for which only Rs.15,000/- has now been awarded. 8. The above discussions lead us to the conclusion that the appellant is entitled to the following further amounts as compensation in addition to the amounts awarded by the Tribunal: 1. Loss of earnings : Rs.4,000/-(3000x4 minus 8000) 2. Pain and suffering : Rs.10,000/-(25000 minus 15000) 3. Loss of amenities : Rs.7,500/- (global) 4. The additional amount due to reverse the error in addition : Rs.2,000/-. -------------- Total Rs.23,500/- ========= 9. The learned counsel for the appellant submits that interest has been awarded only at the rate of 6% per annum. The same deserves to be enhanced realistically contends the counsel. We are satisfied that interest can be awarded at the rate of 7.5% C.M.App.No.1069 OF 2011 & M.A.C.A No.651 OF 2011 5 per annum on the entire amount of compensation from the date of petition to the date of deposits/payment. 10. In the result; (a) This appeal is allowed in part. (b) The appellant is found entitled to a further amount of Rs.23,500/-(Rupees twenty three thousand and five hundred only) in addition to the amounts already awarded by the Tribunal. (c) We direct that interest be paid on the entire amount of compensation at 7.5% per annum from the date of the petition to the date of realisation. (d) All other directions of the Tribunal are upheld. R.BASANT, JUDGE N.K.BALAKRISHNAN, JUDGE mns