IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE M.N.KRISHNAN MONDAY, THE 25TH AUGUST 2008 / 3RD BHADRA 1930 MACA.No. 1041 of 2007(C) ------------------------------ OPMV.569/1998 of MOTOR ACCIDENTS CLAIMS TRIBUNAL, MAVELIKKARA .................... APPELLANT/ PETITIONER: ---------------------------- VIJAYAN, MULAVANA, KUTTOOR, THIRUVALLA, NOW RESIDING AT CHEMPAKAPARAMBIL THEKKETHIL, KARUVATTA. BY ADV. SRI.K.HARILAL SRI.R.GOPAN RESPONDENTS: RESPONDENTS: ------------------------------------ 1. PHILIPOSE, KOZHENCHERRY AUTO FUELS, KOZHENCHERRY. 2. DIVISIONAL MANAGER, NEW INDIA ASSURANCE CO. LTD., COCHIN. BY ADV. SRI.P.JAYASANKAR FOR R2 THIS MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS APPEAL HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 25/08/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: M.N. KRISHNAN, J. = = = = = = = = = = = = = = M.A.C.A. NO. 1041 OF 2007 = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = Dated this the 25th day of August, 2008. J U D G M E N T This appeal is preferred against the award of the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Mavelikkara in O.P.(MV)569/98. The claimant, a 26 year old labourer by profession sustained injuries in a road accident which took place on 23.11.97. The accident took place when the claimant was crossing Chengannur - Thiruvalla M.C. Road near Thiruvalla K.S.R.T.C. bus stand. The Tribunal found that the claimant has stated that he was crossing through the zebra line but the scene mahazar did not reveal the same and therefore came to the conclusion that it is a negligent crossing and therefore dismissed the claim petition on the ground of negligence. Learned counsel for the claimant had made available before me all the documents relating to the case. A perusal of the scene mahazar would reveal that the accident had taken place 5 metres and 41 cms. east of the western tarred end in a road which is having a width of 13 meters. Admittedly the M.A.C.A. 1041 OF 2007 -:2:- place of accident is a very crowded place where there is large traffic. It is true that the pedestrians have to be vigilant. Equally so the drivers of the vehicles. When an accident takes place in a very crowded part of a city that too near a bus stand it is certain that the drivers of the vehicles should be more cautious anticipating the unexpected crossing of road by laymen or children. So there is responsibility cast on the driver of the vehicles equally. The claimant also should have been more vigilant. He should have waited to see whether vehicles are coming from both sides before the actual crossing of the road. Considering the fact that it was a crowded place I feel this is a fit case where negligence can be apportioned 60% on the driver and 40% on the claimant. 2. The next question is regarding the quantum. A perusal of the wound certificate would reveal that he was treated in Pushpagiri Hospital, Thiruvalla and he had undergone inpatient treatment for a period from 24.11.97 to 8.12.97. He had sustained a contusion over the left clavicle but later revealed that he had sustained a fracture. Besides this he had also other injuries on the back of the right elbow. M.A.C.A. 1041 OF 2007 -:3:- He was aged 26 years and a coolie by profession I proceed to fix the compensation as follows. 3. Being a 26 year old man and a labourer by profession there is nothing wrong in fixing the income at Rs.1,500/- and therefore I award Rs.3,000/- towards actual loss of earnings for two months. He was inpatient for four days and he would have taken some nutritious food. Taking into consideration both these aspects together I grant Rs.1,400/- towards bystander's and extra nutritious food expenses. Certainly, he would have spent money for treatment in a private hospital. Since it relates to the period of 1997 I award Rs.1,500/- towards treatment expenses. Certainly, he would have suffered pain on account of the injuries sustained and I award Rs.7,000/- for the same. He would have also suffered temporary loss of amenities and enjoyment in life. For which I award Rs.4,000/-. Therefore the total compensation would come to Rs.16,900/- and the claimant will be entitled to only 60% of the said amount, i.e. Rs.10,140/-. M.A.C.A. 1041 OF 2007 -:4:- In the result the MACA is partly allowed and the claimant is awarded a compensation of Rs.10,140/- with 7% interest on the said sum from the date of petition till realisation and the insurance company is directed to deposit the same within a period of sixty days from the date of receipt of a copy of the judgment. M.N. KRISHNAN, JUDGE. ul/-