IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE A.K.BASHEER & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.Q.BARKATH ALI FRIDAY, THE 30TH JULY 2010 / 8TH SRAVANA 1932 MACA.No. 1698 of 2005(C) ----------------------- OPMV.1986/1995 of II ADDL. M.A.C.T., KOZHIKODE .................... APPELLANT/PETITIONER IN THE O.P.(MV) -------------------------------------------------- K.MUSTHAFA, S/O.VEERAN HAJI, KANNANPARAMBATH HOUSE, FEROKE COLLEGE.P.O., KOZHIKODE. BY ADV. SMT.LATHA PRABHAKARAN RESPONDENT(S): RESPONDENTS IN THE O.P.(MV) ------------------------------------------ 1. P.K.GOPALAN NAIR, S/O.KRISHNA KURUP, MANJERIYIL HOUSE, PUTTOTH.P.O., CHERUVANNUR,MEPPAYUR, KOYILANDY. 2. V.K.MUHAMMED KUTTY, S/O.MOHAMMED, MUNAMBATH HOUSE, FEROKE COLLEGE.P.O., CALICUT. 3. THE UNITED INDIA INSURANCE COMPANY LIMITED, BRANCH OFFICE, MELE ROAD, BADAGARA, CALICUT. ADV. SRI.PMM.NAJEEB KHAN FOR R3 SMT.R.REMA FOR R3 THIS MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS APPEAL HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 30/07/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: A.K. BASHEER & P.Q. BARKATH ALI, JJ. ------------------------------------------------------ M.A.C.A. 1698 of 2005 ------------------------------------------------------ Dated: JULY 30, 2010 JUDGMENT Barkath Ali, J. The appellant is the claimant in OP(MV) 1986/1995 on the file of the 2nd Additional Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Kozhikode. The claimant sustained a crush injury on left hand as a result of which his phalanx of index finger, ring finger and middle finger had to be amputated. The accident happened on May 24, 1995 while the jeep bearing registration No.KRZ 2498 in which he was travelling hit on the electric post on the side of the road. Alleging negligence against the 2nd respondent, he filed the OP claiming a compensation of Rs.3 lakhs. 2. Respondent No.1, owner of the offending jeep, filed a written statement stating that he had sold the vehicle on August 19, 1994 to one Chandran and therefore he is not liable. The 2nd respondent, driver of the jeep, denied the liability. The 3rd respondent, insurer of the offending vehicle, admitted the policy. 3. Exts.A1 to A5 were marked on the side of the claimant before the Tribunal. No evidence was adduced on the side of the respondents. On an appreciation of evidence the Tribunal found M.A.C.A.1698 of 2005 2 that the accident occurred due to the negligence of the 2nd respondent and awarded a total compensation of Rs.65,700/- with interest @ 9% per annum from the date of petition till realisation and a cost of Rs1000/-. The claimant has now come up in appeal challenging the quantum of compensation awarded by the Tribunal. 4. Heard the counsel for the appellant/claimant and the counsel for the Insurance Company. 5. The accident is not disputed. The finding of the Tribunal that the accident occurred due to the negligence on the part of the 2nd respondent is not challenged in this appeal. Therefore the only question which arises for consideration is whether the claimant is entitled to any enhanced compensation. 6. The break up of the compensation amount awarded is as under: disability Rs.35,700/- pain and suffering 17,000/- loss of amenities 9,000/- on other eligible counts 4,000/- 7. Counsel for the claimant sought enhancement of the compensation for the disability caused, for loss of amenities and enjoyment of life and for pain and suffering endured by the claimant. The Tribunal took the monthly income of the claimant as Rs.1500/-, M.A.C.A.1698 of 2005 3 adopted a multiplier of 17, took the percentage of disability as 21% and awarded Rs.35,700/- as the compensation for the disability caused. As the claimant was aged only 23, we feel that his monthly income can be reasonably fixed at Rs.2000/-. The multiplier adopted by the Tribunal as 17 and the percentage of disability as 21% are not seriously challenged. Thus calculated, for the disability caused the claimant is entitled to a compensation of Rs.85,680/-. Therefore on this count the claimant is entitled to an additional compensation of Rs.49,980/-. 8. The Tribunal awarded Rs.9000/- as the compensation for the loss of amenities and enjoyment of life. The tip of three fingers of the claimant were amputated. Therefore we feel that for loss of amenities and enjoyment of life, a compensation of Rs.15,000/- would be reasonable. 9. A sum of Rs.17,000/- was awarded for the pain and suffering endured by the claimant. Taking into consideration the nature of the injuries sustained, we feel that a compensation of Rs.20,000/- would be reasonable on this count. As regards the compensation awarded under other heads, we find the same to be reasonable and therefore we are not disturbing the same. 10. Thus the claimant is entitled to an additional compensation M.A.C.A.1698 of 2005 4 of Rs.58,980/-. He is entitled to interest @ 9% per annum from the date of petition till realisation and proportionate cost. The 3rd 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. The award of the Tribunal is modified to the above extent. The appeal is disposed of as found above. A.K. BASHEER, JUDGE P.Q. BARKATH ALI, JUDGE mt/-