IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE A.K.BASHEER & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.Q.BARKATH ALI TUESDAY, THE 24TH MAY 2011 / 3RD JYAISHTA 1933 MACA.No. 448 of 2004() ---------------------- OPMV.671/1995 of MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS TRIBUNAL, KALPETTA .................... APPELLANT(S): APPELLANT/PETITIONER IN THE OPMV. ----------------------------------------------- M.S.PEMMAIAH,S/O.M.G.SOMAIAH, SUPERVISOR,KARIMBUMMAL ESTATE, PANAMARAM.P.O.,WAYANAD DISTRICT, PRESENTLY RESIDING AT KUMTOOR VILLAGE, KAKOOR POST,KODAGU,KARNATAKA STATE. BY ADV. SRI.THOMAS ANTONY RESPONDENTS/ RESPONDENTS --------------------------------------- 1. T.K.MANI,S/O.KURIAKOSE, VETTATHU HOUSE,P.O.PAMPADI, (DRIVER KSRTC HAVING BADGE NO.K/32/78) DRIVING LICENSE NO.K/1419/92, KOTTAYAM DISTRICT. 2. MANAGING DIRECTOR, KSRTC,THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, OWNER OF THE BUS KL-15/1773 T.A.739. ADV. SRI.SAJEEVKUMAR K.GOPAL, SC, KSRTC FOR R2 SRI.NANDAGOPAL NAMBIAR B/O FOR R2 THIS MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS APPEAL HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 24/05/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: A.K.BASHEER & P.Q.BARKATH ALI, JJ. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - M.A.C.A.No.448 OF 2004 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Dated this the 24th day of May, 2011 JUDGMENT Barkath Ali, J. Appellant is the claimant in O.P.(MV)No.671/1995 on the file of Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Wayanad, Kalpetta . In this appeal he challenges the judgment and award of the Tribunal dated August 31, 2002 awarding a compensation of Rs.68,725/- for the loss caused to him on account of the injuries sustained by him in a motor accident. He sustained the following injuries in that accident that occurred on January 15, 1995 at about 6.05 p.m: 1. Fracture of right fibula. 2. Fracture of right heel. 3. Lacerated injury on right heel 'U' shaped 6 x 2 cm. 4. Lacerated injuries on right thigh, left knee and on both hands. 2. The accident happened while the claimant was travelling in a KSRTC bus bearing Reg.No.KL-15/1773 driven by the first respondent and when he reached at Thekkemala, the bus collided head on with another bus bearing Reg.No.KL-3A/7120. Alleging negligence against the first respondent, the claimant filed the O.P. before the MACA.No.448/2004 2 Tribunal under Section 166 of Motor Vehicles Act claiming a compensation of Rs. 1,57,000/-. 3. Respondents 1 and 2, the driver and the owner of the offending KSRTC bus filed a joint written statement admitting the accident, but denied the liability. 4. PW1 was examined and Exts.A1 to A12 were marked on the side of the claimant before the Tribunal. No evidence was adduced by the respondents. The Tribunal on an appreciation of evidence found that the accident occurred due to the rash and negligent driving of the offending bus by first respondent and awarded a compensation of Rs. 68,725/- with interest @ 9% per annum from the date of petition till realisation. The claimant has now come up in appeal challenging the quantum of compensation awarded by the Tribunal. 5. Heard the counsel for the appellant/claimant and the counsel for the Insurance Company. 6. The accident is not disputed. The finding of the Tribunal that the accident occurred due to the negligence on the part of the first respondent is not challenged in this appeal. Therefore, the only question which arises for consideration is whether the claimant is MACA.No.448/2004 3 entitled to any enhanced compensation. 7. The Tribunal awarded a total compensation of Rs.68,725/-. The break up of the compensation amount awarded is as under: Extra nourishment - Rs. 750/- Pain and suffering - Rs.10,000/- Bystander expenses - Rs. 1,250/- Disability - Rs. 12,000/- Loss of earning - Rs. 5,100/- Transportation - Rs. 3,875/- Damage to clothing - Rs. 250/- Treatment expenses - Rs. 35,500/- 8. Counsel for the claimant sought enhancement of compensation for the disability caused and on other heads. He pointed out that no compensation was awarded for loss of amenities and enjoyment of life. 9. The Tribunal awarded a compensation of Rs.12,000/- for the disability caused. The Tribunal took the monthly income of the claimant as Rs.1,700/-. In Ext.A5 certificate of disability, it is certified that claimant has a permanent disability of 5%. He was aged 34 and was working as a Supervisor in Karimbummel estate, Panamaram, Wayanad District. Taking into consideration the above aspects, we feel that for the disability caused, a compensation of Rs. 20,000/- would be MACA.No.448/2004 4 reasonable. 10. The Tribunal did not award any amount for loss of amenities and enjoyment in life. Having regards to the nature of the injuries sustained by the claimant, we feel that a compensation of Rs. 5,000/- 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. 11. In the result, the claimant is found entitled to an additional compensation of Rs. 13,000/-. He is entitled to interest @ 9% per annum from the date of petition till realisation and proportionate cost. The second respondent being the owner 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 sv. MACA.No.448/2004 5 MACA.No.448/2004 6 MACA.No.448/2004 7