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 10TH JUNE 2010 / 20TH JYAISTHA 1932 MACA.No. 801 of 2010() ---------------------------------- OPMV.1132/2003 of MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS TRIBUNAL, THALASSERY .................... APPELLANT/PETITIONER ------------------------------------- SANEESH. U.P, S/O.RAGHAVAN, AGED 25 YEARS, PARANTHODE HOUSE, P.O.KAPPAD, KANNUR DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.P.M.PAREETH, SRI.MOHAMMED SHAMEEL. RESPONDENTS/RESPONDENTS ----------------------------------------------- 1. ANWAR. P, S/O.MOIDEEN, PARAMBATH HOUSE, CHELAVOOR.P.O, CALICUT, PIN-974 911. 2. SAIDU RIYAS. S, S/O.HATHIM, MORIKKARA, KAKKODI, CALICUT. 3. THE ORIENTAL INSURANCE COMPANY LTD., CALICUT. BY THIS MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS APPEAL HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 10/06/2010,THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: rs. A.K.BAHSEER & P.Q.BARKATH ALI, JJ. =~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~= M.A.C.A. No. 801 of 2010 =~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~= Dated this the 10th day of June, 2010 JUDGMENT Barkath Ali, J. In this appeal under Section 173 of Motor Vehicles Act, the claimant in O.P. (MV) No.1132 of 2003 of Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Thalassery challenges the judgment and award of the Tribunal dated November 12, 2009 awarding a compensation of Rs.81,700/- for the loss caused to him on account of the injuries sustained by him in a motor accident. 2. The facts leading to this appeal, in brief, are these:- The claimant was aged 25 at the time of the accident and used to earn Rs.4,500/- per month as a Fitter, according to the claimant. On May 28, 2003 at about 9.30 p.m. the claimant was walking along the side of the road at Thazhe Chovva. At that time a Maruthi car bearing registration No.KL-11P-8552, driven by the second respondent, came at a high speed and knocked him down. The claimant MACA 801/2010 2 sustained serious injuries. According to the claimant, the accident occurred due to the rash and negligent driving of the offending car by the second respondent. First respondent as the owner, second respondent as the driver and third respondent as the insurer of the offending car are jointly and severally liable to pay compensation to the claimant. The claimant claimed a compensation of Rs.1,50,000/-. 3. Respondents 1 and 2, the owner and the driver of the offending car, remained absent before the Tribunal. The third respondent, the insurer of the offending car, filed a written statement, admitting the policy. 4. PWs.1 and 2 were examined and Exts.A1 to A8 were marked on the side of the claimant before the Tribunal. No evidence was adduced by contesting third respondent. The Tribunal, on an appreciation of evidence, awarded a compensation of Rs.81,700/-. The claimant has now come up in appeal challenging the quantum of compensation awarded by the Tribunal. 5. Heard learned counsel for the appellant/claimant. MACA 801/2010 3 On going through the award of the Tribunal, we are of the view that the appeal can be disposed of even without notice to the respondents. 6. The accident is not disputed. The finding of the Tribunal that the accident occurred due to the negligence on the part of the second respondent, driver of the car, 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 claimant sustained the following injuries, as revealed from Ext.A2 wound certificate issued from the Speciality Hospital, Kannur:- 1) Nasal bleeding and head-ache. 2) Abrasion on the frontal area of forehead right cheek. 3) Swelling on right eye brow. 4) Abrasion on the left thump. C.T. scan report shows “right frontal extradural haematoma”. Ext.A8 certificate of disability issued by PW2 says that the petitioner is having permanent total disability MACA 801/2010 4 of 25%. 8. The Tribunal awarded a total compensation of Rs.81,700/-. Break up of the amount awarded is as under :- Disability income : Rs.28,800/- Medical expense : Rs.25,900/- Bystander's expense : Rs. 1,000/- Pain and sufferings : Rs.15,000/- Extra nourishments and : Rs. 3,000/- review. Loss of earnings : Rs. 3,000/- Future medical expense : Rs. 5,000/- -------------------- Total : Rs.81,700/- ======== 9. The learned counsel for appellant sought enhancement of compensation towards the disability caused. 10. The claimant was a Fitter, aged 25 at the time of the accident. As no evidence was adduced to show his monthly income, the Tribunal took his monthly income as Rs.3,000/-, adopted a multiplier of 16, took disability as 5% and awarded a compensation of Rs.28,900/- for the disability caused. The learned counsel for the claimant submits that due to the injury sustained, the mental function of the claimant has affected and that, therefore, MACA 801/2010 5 the Tribunal is not justified in reducing the percentage of disability as 5%. We are unable to agree. The claimant was examined before the Tribunal as PW1 and he was cross- examined by the learned counsel for the third respondent. PW1 has withstood the cross-examination. Therefore, the Tribunal is perfectly justified in deducting the percentage of disability as 5%. That apart taking into consideration the nature of the injuries sustained and treatment the claimant has undergone, we feel that the compensation awarded by the Tribunal is just and reasonable. It follows that the claimant is not entitled to any enhanced compensation. Therefore, the appeal has to be dismissed. In the result, the appeal is dismissed. No costs. A.K. BASHEER, JUDGE. P.Q.BARKATH ALI, JUDGE. mn.