IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE A.K.BASHEER & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.Q.BARKATH ALI MONDAY, THE 21ST MARCH 2011 / 30TH PHALGUNA 1932 MACA.No. 1424 of 2008() ------------------------------------- OPMV.46/2004 of MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS TRIBUNAL, THODUPUZHA .................... APPELLANT(SPETITIONER:- ------------------------------------ VINEETH, S/O GOPAKUMAR, BLOCK NO.1, KALLARKARA, PAMBADUMPARA, VILLAGE, IDUKKI DISTRICT. BY ADVS. SRI.C.K.VIDYASAGAR SRI.P.CHANDY JOSEPH RESPONDENT(S): RESPONDENT ------------------------------------------------ 1. UDAYAKUMAR, S/O PURUSHOTHAMAN, BLOCK NO.1346, NEDUMKANDOM. 2. MANU, S/O MANIYAN, KUNNUMKUZHIYIL, CHAKKAKANAM,KALKOONTHAL VILLAGE. 3. NEW INDIA ASSURANCE COMPANY LIMITED, KANJIRATHANAM BUILDING, KATTAPPANA. R3 BY ADV. SRI.JOY GEORGE, SMT.PRAICY JOSEPH. THIS MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS APPEAL HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 21/03/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: tss A.K. BASHEER & P.Q. BARKATH ALI, JJ. ------------------------------------- M.A.C.A No. 1424 OF 2008 ------------------------------------- DATED THIS THE 21st DAY OF MARCH, 2011 JUDGMENT B arkath Ali, J: Appellant is the claimant in O.P. (MV) No.46/2004 on the file of Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Thodupuzha. In this appeal he challenges the judgment and award of the Tribunal dated July 23, 2007 awarding a compensation of Rs.65,300/- for the loss caused to the claimant on account of the injuries sustained by him in a motor accident. 2. The accident happened on September, 10, 2003 at 5.40 p.m in front of the Panchayat shopping complex at Nedumkandom. While the claimant was pillion riding on a motor cycle bearing registration No.KL-6A/9057 along Kumily-Munnar road it collided head on with an autorickshaw bearing registration No.KL-6B/4817. The claimant sustained the following injuries in that accident. (i) A cut wound over the chest wall measuring 4x3x2cm . M.A.C.A No.1424/2008 -2- (ii) An irregular abrasion over the right foot. (iii) An irregular abrasion on the anterior aspect of right leg. (iv) In X-ray showed fracture of distal part of tibia and fibula right. 3. Alleging negligence against the second respondent, the driver of the autorickshaw the claimant filed the O.P. before the Tribunal under Section 166 of Motor Vehicles Act claiming a compensation of Rs. 75,000/-. 4. Respondents 1 and 2, the owner and the driver of the offending vehicle remained absent before the Tribunal. The 3rd Respondent, the insurer of the offending autorickshaw filed a written statement admitting the policy of the autorickshaw. 5. Claimant was examined as PW1 and Exts.A1 to A11 were marked on the side of the claimant before the Tribunal. On the side of the contesting third respondent Ext.B1 was marked. On an appreciation of evidence the Tribunal found that the accident happened due to the negligence of the second respondent and awarded a compensation of Rs. 65,300/- with interest @ 8% per annum M.A.C.A No.1424/2008 -3- from the date of petition till realisation and proportionate cost. The claimant has now come up in appeal challenging the quantum of compensation awarded by the Tribunal. 6. Heard the counsel for the 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 of the second respondent and that the claimant sustained injuries mentioned above in the said accident are 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 Tribunal awarded a total compensation of Rs.65,300/-. The break up of the compensation amount awarded is as under: Loss of earnings - Rs. 5,000/- Transportation expenses - Rs. 750/- Extra nourishment - Rs. 1,500/- Bye-stander expenses - Rs. 2,000/- Treatment expenses - Rs. 250/- Pain and suffering - Rs.15,000/- Disability - Rs.40,800/- M.A.C.A No.1424/2008 -4- 9. Counsel for the claimant sought enhancement of compensation for the disability caused and on other heads. 10. The Tribunal took the monthly income of the claimant as Rs.2,000/- and took the percentage of disability as 10% and adopted a multiplier of 17 as the claimant was aged 26 at the time of accident and awarded Rs.40,800/- for the disability caused. Claimant claims to be a teacher aged 26 and earning Rs.10,000/- per month, according to him. Taking into consideration of the above aspect, we feel that the monthly income of the claimant can be reasonably fixed at Rs. 3,000/-. In Ext A11 certificate issued by the Doctor the percentage of permanent disability sustained by the claimant is shown as 15%. Taking into consideration the nature of the disabilities caused to the claimant, we feel that the percentage of disability as 10% taken by the tribunal reasonable. The multiplier adopted as 17 is not seriously challenged. Thus calculated for the disability caused claimant is entitled to a compensation of Rs.61,200/- (3000 x 12 x 17 x 10%). Thus on this count, the claimant is M.A.C.A No.1424/2008 -5- entitled to an additional compensation of Rs.20,400/- (61,200-40,800). 11. The Tribunal awarded Rs.250/- towards treatment expenses. The claimant has produced Ext.A8 series bills worth Rs.5,532.88. No reason is stated by the Tribunal in not awarding an amount covered by these bills. Taking into account the nature of injuries sustained by the claimant we feel that towards treatment expenses claimant is entitled to a compensation of Rs.5,533/-. 12. No compensation is seen awarded for loss of amenities and enjoyment in life. Having regard to the nature of the injuries sustained by the claimant we feel that a compensation of Rs.15,000/- would be reasonable for loss of amenities and enjoyment in life. As regards the compensation awarded under other heads, we find the same to be reasonable and therefore we are not disturbing the same. 13. Thus the claimant is found entitled to an additional compensation of Rs.40,933/-. He is entitled to M.A.C.A No.1424/2008 -6- interest @ 7.5% per annum from the date of petition till realisation and proportionate costs. 14. The third 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 with notice to the claimant. The Appeal is disposed of as found above. Sd/- A.K. BASHEER, JUDGE. Sd/- P.Q. BARKATH ALI, JUDGE. AMG True copy P.A to Judge