IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE R.BASANT & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE N.K.BALAKRISHNAN WEDNESDAY, THE 13TH JULY 2011 / 22ND ASHADHA 1933 MACA.No. 1199 of 2005() ----------------------- OPMV.709/1999 of MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS TRIBUNAL, KALPETTA .................... APPELLANT(S): APPELLANT/PETITIONER ---------------------------------- GARVASIS, S/O.PAILY, AGED 29 YEARS, THENGADA HOUSE, P.O.EDAVAKA, MANANTHAVADY TALUK. BY ADV. SRI.ABRAHAM MATHEW (VETTOOR) RESPONDENT(S): --------------- 1. P.S.SHAJI, AGED 26 YEARS, S/O.SAIMON, PULIKKAL HOUSE, NADAVAYAL, VYTHIRI TALUK, (DRIVER OF THE JEEP NO.KL-10-H/45431). 2. P.V.JOY, AGE NOT KNOWN, S/O.VARGHESE, MUNDAKKAL HOUSE, P.O.MEENANGADY, BATHERY TALUK, (OWNER OF THE JEEP NO.KL-10H/45431). 3. NATIONAL INSURANCE COMPANY, KALPETTA, (LOCAL) BRANCH OF THE INSURER MANJERI BRANCH, PANDIKKAD ROAD, POLICY NO. 570305/31/98/10046/E/413/99, FROM 26.7.99 TO 25.3.2000. ADV. SRI.GEORGE CHERIAN (THIRUVALLA) FOR R3 THIS MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS APPEAL HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 13/07/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: R. BASANT & N.K. BALAKRISHNAN, JJ. ------------------------------------------------- C.M. Appl. No.1655 of 2005 & M.A.C.A. No.1199 of 2005-C ------------------------------------------------- Dated this the 13th day of July, 2011 JUDGMENT Basant,J. C.M. Appl. No.1655 of 2005: This petition is to condone the delay of 172 days in filing a M.A.C.A. Heard. We take a lenient view. Petition allowed. Delay condoned. M.A.C.A. No.1199 of 2005: The claimant is the appellant. He claimed compensation for personal injuries suffered by him in a motor accident which took place on 16/10/96. Against a claim of Rs.1,50,000/-, the Tribunal directed payment of an amount of Rs.30,500/- as per the details shown below: 1. Loss of earnings - Rs.3,000/- (2 months x 1500) 2. Transport to hospital - Rs. 500/- 3. Extra nourishment - Rs.1,000/- M.A.C.A. No.1199 of 2005 -: 2 :- 4. Bystander's expenses - Rs.1,000/- 5. Medical expenses (against bills produced for Rs.4,400/-) - Rs.5,000/- 6. Pain and suffering - Rs.5,000/- 7. Disability - Rs.15,000/- ---------------- Total - Rs.30,500/- ======= 2. The insurer was made liable. The learned counsel for the appellant challenges the impugned award on the short ground that the quantum of compensation awarded is not fair, reasonable and just. 3. The appellant had suffered fractures on the left humerus and on the nasal bone. A lacerated injury on the right eyelid and minor injuries all over the body were also suffered. He was an inpatient for a period of 10 days. He had lost one tooth. He was a driver by profession and to prove this, his driving licence was also produced. He had allegedly suffered disability to the tune of 10%. In support of that, Ext.A8 disability certificate was pressed into service. It was not proved satisfactorily. The relevant portion in Ext.A8 is extracted below: M.A.C.A. No.1199 of 2005 -: 3 :- “Now on careful assessment and examination of Mr. Garvasis, I found that there is terminal restriction of the left elbow movement with pain. He is unable to perform his profession efficiently because of the terminal restriction of the movement of the left elbow. Hence this patient is having permanent disability of the left upper limb about 10% (ten percent only).” 4. No one was examined to prove that certificate. The appellant was not examined by any Medical Board. The Tribunal evidently was not willing to accept and act upon Ext.A8 disability certificate. 5. Called upon to explain the nature of the challenge which the appellant wants to mount against the impugned award, the learned counsel for the appellant submits that the monthly income reckoned for the purpose of computing loss of earnings and the period of involuntary unemployment are too low. The amount awarded under the head of pain and suffering is perversely inadequate, submits the learned counsel for the appellant. For the disability suffered, even assuming that M.A.C.A. No.1199 of 2005 -: 4 :- Ext.A8 cannot be accepted completely, the amount of Rs.15,000/- awarded to too low, submits the learned counsel. 6. We have considered all the relevant submissions. That the appellant is the driver by profession can safely be accepted. His monthly income can safely be assumed to be not less than Rs.2,500/-. It can safely be assumed that the appellant was involuntarily unemployed consequent to the accident for a period of 3 months considering the nature of injuries and the nature of his employment (driver). Considering the period of hospitalisation and the nature of injuries, including fractures, the compensation awarded under the head of pain and suffering also deserves to be enhanced, we are satisfied. Though we are not satisfied that Ext.A8 certificate can be accepted when it speaks that the permanent disability suffered is 10%, we find it absolutely safe to conclude that some disability has been suffered by the appellant. Crisp and cogent evidence on that aspect is not tendered. However, on the available inputs we are satisfied that an amount of Rs.25,000/- can safely be awarded as compensation for disability for both the reflections - possible reduction in earning capacity and the impairment in the quality of life which a person can aspire to enjoy. M.A.C.A. No.1199 of 2005 -: 5 :- 7. The above discussions lead us to the conclusion that the appellant is entitled to a further amount of Rs.19,500/- as compensation in addition to the amounts already awarded by the Tribunal: 1. Loss of earnings (3 x 2500 minus 3000) - Rs.4,500/- 2. Pain and suffering (Rs.10,000/- minus Rs.5,000/-)- Rs.5,000/- 3. Disability (all reflections) (Rs.25,000/- minus Rs.15,000/-)- Rs.10,000/- --------------- Total - Rs.19,500/- ======= 8. Interest has been awarded only at the rate of 6% per annum. We are satisfied that the appellant is entitled to a fair and reasonable percentage of interest at the rate of 7.5% per annum from the date of the petition to the date of payment. 9. In the result: (a) This appeal is allowed in part. (b) The appellant is entitled to a further amount of Rs.19,500/- (Rupees nineteen thousand five hundred only) in addition to the amounts already awarded by the Tribunal. (c) The appellant shall be entitled to interest at the rate of M.A.C.A. No.1199 of 2005 -: 6 :- 7.5% per annum on the entire amount of compensation from the date of petition to the date of payment. (d) All other directions of the Tribunal are upheld. Sd/- R. BASANT (Judge) Sd/- N.K. BALAKRISHNAN (Judge) Nan/ //true copy// P.S. to Judge