IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE R.BASANT & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE C.T.RAVIKUMAR THURSDAY, THE 5TH MARCH 2009 / 14TH PHALGUNA 1930 MACA.No. 354 of 2003() ---------------------- OPMV.184/1995 of MOTOR ACCIDENTS CLAIMS TRIBUNAL, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM .................... APPELLANT(S)/APPLICANT: ---------------------------------- B. RAJASEKHARAN NAIR, S/O. BHASKARA PILLAI, GOVT. CONTRACTOR, DEVI BHAVAN, PALLICHAL P.O., THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. BY ADV. SMT.P.K.RADHIKA RESPONDENT(S): RESPONDENTS: --------------------------- 1. M. SKTHIDHARAN NAIR, S/O. MADHAVAN THAMPI, MELE VEEDU, KRUIYATHI MANACAUD P.O., THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 2. UNITED INSURANCE COMPANY LIMITED MALANKARA BUILDING, IIND FLOOR, V.J.T. HALL ROAD, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 3. P. VENUGOPAL, EASWARA VILAS, SREEKANTESWARAM, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. ADVS. SRI.BABU JOSEPH KURUVATHAZHA FOR R1 SMT.A.KUMARI MINI FOR R1 SRI.P.SANKARANKUTTY NAIR FOR R2 THIS MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS APPEAL HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 05/03/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: R. BASANT & C.T. RAVIKUMAR, JJ. --------------------------------------------------------- M.A.C.A. NO. 354 OF 2003 --------------------------------------------------------- Dated this the 5th day of March, 2009 JUDGMENT Basant, J. The claimant before the Tribunal is the appellant before us. He claimed an amount of Rs.2,00,000/- as compensation for the loss suffered by him as a result of the personal injuries suffered in a motor accident which took place on 9.9.1994. He was a Government contractor and allegedly earning an income of Rs.10,000/- per mensem. He suffered fracture of the 4th metatargal of the left foot. External injury was also suffered by him. He was not admitted as an inpatient, but he continued treatment as an outpatient for a period of 25 days. He had allegedly suffered physical disability to the extent of 10%. 2. Before the Tribunal, the claimant examined himself as PW.1. Exts.A1 to A8 series were marked. The Tribunal, on an anxious consideration of all the relevant inputs, came to the conclusion that the appellant is entitled for a total compensation of Rs.21,250/- along with interest at the rate of 9% per annum from the date of the petition. The details of the amounts awarded are given below: M.A.C.A. NO.354/2003 2 i. Pain and suffering :Rs. 8,000/- ii. Loss of earning (3000 x 1 ½ months) :Rs. 4,500/- iii. Medical expenses (actual bills for Rs.2,465.28) :Rs. 2,500/- iv. Transportation to hospital :Rs. 1,000/- v. Damage to clothing :Rs. 250/- vi. Compensation for discomfiture and difficulties on account of injury :Rs. 5,000/- --------------- Total :Rs.21,250/- --------------- 3. According to the learned counsel for the appellant, the amounts awarded are too inadequate and insufficient. Counsel, first of all, contends that the income of the appellant for the years 1992-93 and 1993-94 exceeded Rs.90,000/- and in these circumstances, reckoning of the monthly income as Rs.3,000/- is not justified at all. We are persuaded to agree with the learned counsel. That the appellant must have been involuntarily unemployed for 1 ½ months is absolutely acceptable and no interference is warranted on that aspect. But, we are satisfied that the monthly income of the appellant, an income tax assessee for a long period prior to the accident, can be safely reckoned at Rs.5,000/-. Accordingly, the appellant will be entitled for an amount of Rs.3,000/- more (5000x 1 ½ minus 4500) in addition to the amount awarded by the Tribunal. M.A.C.A. NO.354/2003 3 4. Counsel next contends that though a bill was produced to show that the appellant had incurred an amount of Rs.5,000/- towards treatment as an outpatient, the Tribunal had not awarded any amount under that head and that the said claim was turned down. The wound had to be dressed and it is reasonable to assume that expenses must have been incurred for such treatment, contends counsel. We find merit in the said contention. Though we are not able to accept the voucher for Rs.5,000/-, we reckon Rs.2,500/- as a reasonable amount to be paid under the head miscellaneous medical expenses in addition to the amount awarded by the Tribunal against the actual bills produced. 5. Finally, counsel contends that compensation for discomfiture suffered has not been properly assessed. Though disability certificate was produced, the Tribunal did not accept the same. Still, the Tribunal felt that in addition to Rs.8,000/- awarded for pain and suffering, some amount was liable to paid for the discomfiture and difficulties endured by the appellant and awarded Rs.5,000/- under that head. In the totality of materials available, we are satisfied that a further amount of Rs.3,000/- can be awarded under this head also. We are not persuaded to agree that the amount awarded under any other head deserves modification. M.A.C.A. NO.354/2003 4 6. On the basis of our discussion, we come to the conclusion that the appellant is entitled to a total further amount of Rs.8,500/- as per the details shown below: i. Loss of earning (5000x 1 ½ minus 4500) :Rs.3,000/- ii. Miscellaneous medical expenses :Rs.2,500/- iii. Compensation for discomfiture and difficulties (8000 minus 5000) :Rs.3,000/- --------------- Total :Rs.8,500/- --------------- Needless to say that the entire amount of compensation shall carry interest at the rate directed by the Tribunal from the date of petition. 7. Accordingly, the appeal is allowed in part to the above extent. (R. BASANT) JUDGE (C.T. RAVIKUMAR) JUDGE sp/ M.A.C.A. NO.354/2003 5 R. BASANT & C.T. RAVIKUMAR, JJ. M.A.C.A. NO.354/2003 JUDGMENT 5th March, 2009