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 3RD FEBRUARY 2011 / 14TH MAGHA 1932 MACA.No. 62 of 2006() --------------------- OPMV.428/2002 of MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS TRIBUNAL, KALPETTA .................... APPELLANT/3RD RESPONDENT: --------------------------------------- UNITED INDIA INSURANCE COMPANY LTD., REP. BY ITS ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICER,REGIONAL OFFICE SHARANYA, HOSPITAL ROAD, KOCHI-11. BY ADV. SRI.MATHEWS JACOB, SENIOR ADVOCATE SRI.P.JACOB MATHEW RESPONDENT(S): PETITIONER & RESPONDENTS 1 & 2 RESPECTIVELY: ----------------------------------------------------------- 1. NABEESA, AGED 41 YEARS, W/O. ALAVIKUTTY, PARAKKAL HOUSE, LAKKI HILL, MEPPADI POST, VYTHIRI TALUK. 2. SALI, S/O. MOOSA, AGED 29 YEARS, THADATHIL HOUSE, AVILORA, KADUVALLY POST, KOZHIKODE. 3. KAMALASANAN, S/O. P.K. UNNIKRISHNAN, KALESH BHAVAN, THAMARASSERY POST, VIZHAPATTOOR, KOZHIKODE. ADV. SRI.R.BINDU (SASTHAMANGALAM) FOR R3 THIS MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS APPEAL HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 03/02/2011 ALONG WITH MACA NO. 1776 OF 2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: A.K.BASHEER & P.Q.BARKATH ALI, JJ. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - M.A.C.A.Nos.62 OF 2006 & 1776 OF 2008 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Dated this the 3rd day of February, 2011 JUDGMENT Barkath Ali, J. Both these appeals arise out of the same judgment and award of Motor Accidents claims Tribunal, Kalpetta in O.P.(MV)No.428/2002 dated May 16, 2005. In M.A.C.A.No.1776/2008, the claimant has challenged the quantum of compensation awarded by the Tribunal for the loss caused to her on account of the injury sustained by her in a motor accident. In M.A.C.A.No.62/2006, the third respondent Insurance Company has challenged the quantum of compensation awarded by the Tribunal alleging that the same is excessive. 2. The accident happened on June 9, 2002 at about 6 p.m. while the claimant was travelling in the Tata Sumo bearing Reg.No.KL 11 G-5787. Due to the negligence of the driver, first respondent, the vehicle hit on a wall on the side of the road and overturned. Alleging negligence against the first respondent, the claimant filed the O.P. before the Tribunal claiming a compensation of MACA.No.62/06 & 1776/08 2 Rs.7,00,000/-. 3. Respondents 1 and 2, the driver and the owner of the offending vehicle remained absent before the Tribunal. The third respondent, the insurer of the offending vehicle filed a written statement admitting the accident. 4. PW1 was examined and Exts.A1 to A18 were marked on the side of the claimant before the Tribunal. No evidence was adduced by the contesting third respondent. On an appreciation of evidence, the Tribunal found that the accident occurred due to the negligence of the first respondent and awarded a compensation of Rs. 5,93,500/- with interest @ 6% per annum from the date of petition till realisation and a cost of Rs. 6,000/-. The claimant has now come up in appeal challenging the quantum of compensation awarded by the Tribunal. 5. Heard the counsel for the claimant/appellant 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 of the first respondent is not challenged in these appeals. MACA.No.62/06 & 1776/08 3 7. The following points arise for consideration : 1. Whether the compensation awarded by the Tribunal is excessive ? 2. If not, whether the claimant is entitled to any enhanced compensation. 8. The Tribunal awarded a total compensation of Rs. 5,93,500/-. The break up of the compensation awarded is as under : Future treatment - Rs. 25,000/- Loss of earnings - Rs. 48,000/- Transport charges - Rs. 10,000/- Extra nourishment - Rs. 6,400/- Bystander expenses - Rs. 6,400/- Damage to clothing - Rs. 500/- Medical expenses - Rs .40,000/- Pain and suffering - Rs.1,50,000/- Disability - Rs. 3,07,200/- 9. Counsel for the claimant sought enhancement of the compensation for the disability caused and on other heads. Insurance Company on the other hand contended that the compensation awarded by the Tribunal is excessive. 10. The claimant sustained the following injuries in the accident : 1. Pain ( R) side clavicle region 2. Complaint of loss of sensation and unable to move both lower limb. MACA.No.62/06 & 1776/08 4 3. Tenderness +ve T 12 C1 spine. 4. Tenderness ( R) clavicle. 11. Taking into consideration the nature of the injury sustained by the claimant and the period of treatment she has undergone and having regard to the fact that she has suffered a disability of 80% and that she has become paraplegic, we feel that the compensation awarded by the Tribunal is not excessive. That being so, M.A.C.A.No.62/2006 filed by the Insurance Company has to be dismissed. 12. The next question is whether the claimant is entitled to any enhanced compensation. The Tribunal took the monthly income of the claimant as Rs. 2,000/-, took the percentage of disability as 80% as certified by the Medical Board in Ext.A12 certificate of disability and adopted a multiplier of 16 and awarded Rs. 3,07,200/- for the disability caused. 13. The claimant was aged 38 and was a coolie at the time of the accident. Taking into consideration the above aspect, we feel that her monthly income can be reasonably fixed at Rs. 3,000/-. The multiplier adopted by the Tribunal as 16 and the percentage of disability as 80% are not seriously challenged. Thus calculated for the MACA.No.62/06 & 1776/08 5 disability caused, the claimant is entitled to a compensation of Rs.4,60,800/- ( 80% x 3000 x 12 x 16). Thus on this count, the claimant is entitled to an additional compensation of Rs.1,53,600/-. 14. The Tribunal awarded Rs. 1,50,000/- for the pain and suffering endured, but did not award any amount for loss of amenities and enjoyment in life. Taking into account the nature of the injuries sustained by the claimant, we feel that a compensation of Rs. 75,000/- for pain and suffering endured and Rs.75,000/- for loss of amenities and enjoyment in life would be reasonable. As regards the compensation awarded under other heads, we find the same to be reasonable and therefore we are not disturbing the same. 15. There is another aspect in this case. 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 realisation for the compensation already awarded and also for the enhanced compensation. 16. In the result, the claimant (appellant in M.A.C.A.No.1776/08) is entitled to an additional compensation of MACA.No.62/06 & 1776/08 6 Rs. 1,53,600/-. She is entitled to interest @ 7.5% per annum from the date of petition till realisation for the compensation already awarded and also for the enhanced compensation and proportionate cost. The third respondent/appellant in M.A.C.A.No.62/2006 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. M.A.C.A.No.62/2006 is dismissed. M.A.C.A.No.1776/2008 is disposed of as found above. A.K.BASHEER, JUDGE P.Q.BARKATH ALI, JUDGE sv. MACA.No.62/06 & 1776/08 7