IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE A.K.BASHEER & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.Q.BARKATH ALI WEDNESDAY, THE 23RD JUNE 2010 / 2ND ASHADHA 1932 MACA.No. 530 of 2006() ---------------------- OPMV 2012/2001 of MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS TRIBUNAL, THRISSUR .................... APPELLANT/PETITIONER ---------------------------------- RADHA, W/O.DEVADAS, ULLATTUTHODIYIL HOUSE, P.O.PALLAM, CHERUTHURUTHY, THRISSUR DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.P.V.CHANDRA MOHAN RESPONDENT(S): RESPONDENTS --------------- 1. KRISHNANKUTTY, 1/278, PANAJERI HOUSE, PARUTHIPRA.P.O, SHORNUR. 2. SATHEESAN, S/O.BALAKRISHNAN, PANANJERI HOUSE, OTTUPRA.P.O, WADAKKANCHERRY, THRISSUR DISTRICT. 3. UNITED INDIA INSURANCE CO. LTD., BRANCH OFFICE, FAISAL BUILDING, MAIN ROAD, OTTAPPALAM. ADV. SRI.S.MAMMU FOR R3 THIS MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS APPEAL HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 23/06/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: A.K. BASHEER & P.Q. BARKATH ALI, JJ. ------------------------------------------------------ M.A.C.A. 530 of 2006 ------------------------------------------------------ Dated: JUNE 23, 2010 JUDGMENT Barkath Ali, J. In this appeal under sec.173 of the Motor Vehicles Act the claimant in OP(MV) 2012/2001 on the file of the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Thrissur, challenges the judgment and award of the Tribunal, dated, September 6, 2005 awarding a compensation of Rs.38,000/- (mistakenly shown as Rs.37,800/- by the Tribunal) for the loss caused to the claimant on account of the injuries sustained by her in a motor accident. 2. The facts leading to this appeal in brief are these: The claimant was a lady aged 35 at the time of the accident. On September 3, 2000 at about 6.30 a.m. the claimant was travelling in an autorickshaw bearing registration No.KL/9F 9703 along Paruthipra. The 2nd respondent who was driving the autorickshaw suddenly turned the autorickshaw, as a result of which the autorickshaw overturned. The claimant sustained serious injuries. According to the claimant the accident occurred due to the rash and negligent driving of the auorickshaw by the 2nd respondent. The 1st respondent as the owner, the 2nd respondent as the driver and the 3rd respondent as the insurer of the offending autorickshaw are M.A.C.A. 530 of 2006 2 jointly and severally liable to pay compensation to the claimant. The claimant claimed a compensation of Rs.1,54,000/-. 3. Respondents 1 and 2, the owner and the driver of the offending autorickshaw, remained absent and were set ex parte by the Tribunal. The 3rd respondent, insurer of the offending autorickshaw, filed a written statement admitting the policy and further contended that the 1st respondent had no valid driving licence at the time of the accident. 4. This O.P. was jointly tried along with OP(MV) 1674/2001 which was filed by another injured person in the same accident and a common award was passed. 5. PWs.1 and 2 were examined and Exts.A1 to A19 were marked on the side of the claimant before the Tribunal. On the side of the contesting 3rd respondent Exts.B1 and B2 were marked. On an appreciation of evidence the Tribunal found that the accident occurred due to the negligence on the part of the 2nd respondent and awarded a compensation of Rs.38,000/- (mistakenly shown as Rs.37,800/- by the Tribunal) with interest @ 7% per annum from the date of petition till realisation with proportionate cost. The claimant has now come up in appeal challenging the quantum of compensation awarded by the Tribunal. M.A.C.A. 530 of 2006 3 6. Heard the counsel for the appellant/claimant and the counsel for the Insurance Company. 7. The accident is not disputed. The finding of the Tribunal that the accident occurred due to the negligence on the part of the 2nd 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. 8. The claimant sustained the following injuries as revealed from Ext.A2, copy of the wound certificate, issued from the hospital, Divine Centre, Wadakkancherry:- 1. Fracture of metacarpals right hand with crush injury, 2. Deep lacerated wound on the dorsum of middle finger right. 3. lacerated wound over the index, ring and little fingers. 9. The Tribunal awarded a total compensation of Rs.38,000/- (mistakenly shown as Rs.37,800/- by the Tribunal). The break up of the compensation awarded is as under:- transportation - Rs.500/- extra nourishment - 500/- medical expenses - 4100/- bystander's expenses - 500/- pain and suffering - 7000/- M.A.C.A. 530 of 2006 4 permanent disability - 14400/- loss of amenities - 8000/- loss of earnings for two months- 3000/- ----------------------- Total 38000/- ============= 10. The Counsel for the appellant/claimant sought enhancement of the compensation for the disability caused. The Tribunal took the monthly income of the claimant as Rs.1500/-, adopted a multiplier of 16 and took the percentage of disability as 5% and awarded a compensation of Rs.14,400/- for the disability caused. Ext.A10 certificate of disability shows that the claimant has suffered a permanent disability of 15%. It is certified therein that the claimant has fixed extension deformity of all the fingers of right hand except the thumb. The claimant was unable to fold her fingers properly. Taking into consideration all these facts, we feel that the percentage of disability can be taken as 15% as stated in Ext.A10. She was aged 35 at the time of the accident. Therefore the proper multiplier that can be adopted is 17. Therefore we feel that her monthly income can be reasonably estimated at Rs.2000/-. Thus calculated, for the disability caused, the claimant is entitled to a compensation of Rs.61,200/- (2000 x 12 x 17 x 15%). As regards the compensation awarded M.A.C.A. 530 of 2006 5 under other heads, we find the same to be reasonable and therefore we are not disturbing the same. 11. The Tribunal has found that the 2nd respondent has no valid driving licence. The 3rd respondent Insurance Company can recover the compensation amount awarded from respondents 1 and 2. The 3rd respondent is also entitled to recover the enhanced compensation from the above respondents. 12. Thus the claimant is entitled to an additional compensation of Rs.46,800/-. She is entitled to interest @ 7% per annum from the date of petition till realisation and proportionate cost. The 3rd 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 mt/-