IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE A.K.BASHEER & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.Q.BARKATH ALI MONDAY, THE 4TH OCTOBER 2010 / 12TH ASWINA 1932 MACA.No. 1096 of 2009() ----------------------- OPMV.1160/2006 of MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS TRIBUNAL, KOTTAYAM .................... APPELLANT(S): PETITIONER. ------------------------- JAIMON, VELIYILPURAYIDOM HOUSE, VAKATHANAM P.O., NJALLIAKUZHY, KOTTAYAM. BY ADV. SRI.S.SUBHASH CHAND SMT.M.P.MARY RESPONDENT(S): RESPONDENTS. --------------------------- 1. RAVEENDRAN, MULAVANAPUTHENPARAMPIL HOUSE, THENGANA, MADAPPALLY. 2. GEORGE JAMES, KIZHAKKEVEETTIL HOUSE, PERUMPANACHY P.O.,KOTTAYAM. 3. NATIONAL INSURANCE CO.LTD, KOTTAYAM. ADV. SRI.LAL GEORGE FOR R3 THIS MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS APPEAL HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 04/10/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: A.K.BASHEER & P.Q.BARKATH ALI, JJ. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - M.A.C.A.No.1096 OF 2009 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Dated this the 4th day of October, 2010 JUDGMENT Barkath Ali, J. Appellant is the claimant in O.P.(MV)No.1160/2006 on the file of Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Kottayam. He sustained the following injuries in a motor accident that occurred on January 4, 2006 at about 3.30 p.m. 1. Fracture right frontal sinus. 2. Fracture lesser wing of left sphenoid and ethmoid homo sinus. 2. The accident happened while the claimant was riding his motor cycle along Kottayam-Puthuppally public road, he was knocked down by a stage carriage bus bearing Reg.No.KL-5T 8701 driven by the first respondent. Alleging negligence against the first respondent, the claimant filed the O.P. before the Tribunal under Section 166 of Motor Vehicles Act claiming a compensation of Rs. 1,25,000/-. 3. Respondents 1 and 2, the driver and the owner of the offending bus remained absent before the Tribunal. The third respondent, the insurer of the offending bus filed a written statement admitting the policy , but denied the liability. MACA.No.1096/2009 2 4. This O.P. was jointly tried along with another O.P. filed by the pillion rider of the motor cycle who also sustained injuries in the accident and a common award was passed by the Tribunal. Exts.A1 to A11 were marked on the side of the claimant before the Tribunal. No evidence was adduced by the contesting third respondent. The Tribunal on an appreciation of evidence found that the accident occurred due to the rash and negligent driving of the offending bus by first respondent and awarded a compensation of Rs. 24,884/- with interest @ 7.5% per annum from the date of petition till realisationt. The claimant has now come up in appeal challenging the quantum of compensation awarded by the Tribunal. 5. Heard the counsel for the appellant/claimant and the counsel for the Insurance Company. 6. The accident is not disputed. The finding of the Tribunal that the accident occurred due to the negligence on the part of the first respondent is not challenged in this appeal. Therefore, the only question which arises for consideration is whether the claimant is entitled to any enhanced compensation. 7. The break up of the compensation awarded is as under : Loss of income - Rs. 3,000/- MACA.No.1096/2009 3 Transport to hospital - Rs. 500/- Medical exp. - Rs. 1,334/- Extra nourishment - Rs. 750/- Bystander expenses - Rs. 1,000/- Damage to clothing - Rs. 300/- Pain and suffering - Rs.15,000/- Loss of amenities - Rs. 3,000/- 8. Counsel for the claimant pointed out that no compensation has been awarded for the disability caused. 9. The claimant produced the certificate of disability issued by the Medical Board of General Hospital, Pathanamthitta which is marked as Ext.X1 in this appeal. It is seen from Ext.X1 that the claimant has the following disabilities : Occasional head-ache, complaints of occasional episodes of giddiness. His grip of right hand appears weak. He is an iron-smith by profession. He is unable to carry out heavy weights. 10. His percentage of disability was assessed at 12%. Taking into consideration the nature of the disabilities caused to him, we feel that his percentage of disability can be assessed at 6%. The claimant was aged 30 and used to earn Rs. 7,000/- per month as a Mechanic, according to him. The Tribunal has assessed his monthly income as Rs.3,000/- which is not seriously disputed. As the claimant was aged only 30, a multiplier of 17 would be reasonable. Thus calculated for MACA.No.1096/2009 4 the disability caused, the claimant is entitled to a compensation of Rs. 36,720/- ( 6% x 3000 x 12 x 17). 11. The Tribunal awarded Rs.3,000/- for loss of amenities and enjoyment in life. Taking into consideration the nature of the injuries sustained by the claimant, we feel that a compensated of Rs. 7,500/- would be reasonable on this count. As regards the compensation awarded under other heads, we find the same to be reasonable and therefore are not disturbing the same. 12. In the result, the claimant is found entitled to an additional compensation of Rs. 41,220/-. He is entitled to interest @ 7.5% per annum from the date of petition till realisation and proportionate cost. The third respondent being the insurer of the offending vehicle shall deposit the amount before the Tribunal within two months from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment. 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 sv. MACA.No.1096/2009 5