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. 805 of 2004() ---------------------- OPMV.1579/1999 of MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS TRIBUNAL, PUNALUR .................... APPELLANT(S): APPELLANT/PETITIONER ---------------------------------- VALSALA, D/O.DEVAKI, VALSALA BHAVAN, CHADAYAMANGALAM, KOTTARAKKARA TALUK, POREDAM P.O. BY ADV. SRI.T.KURIAKOSE PETER SRI.ABRAHAM P.GEORGE RESPONDENT(S): RESPONDENTS -------------------------- 1. SURESH.S., SARITHA BHAVAN, VARKKALA P.O., VARKKALA. 2. BOBY, S/O.SETHU, BOBY VILASOM, MANALAYAM, POREDAM P.O., CHADAYAMANGALAM. 3. THE DIVISIONAL MANAGER, UNITED INDIA INSURANCE CO.LTD., KOLLAM. ADV. SRI.THOMAS MATHEW NELLIMOOTTIL 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.No.805 OF 2004 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Dated this the 30th day of July, 2010 JUDGMENT Barkath Ali, J. Appellant is the claimant in O.P.(MV)No.1579/99 on the file of Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Punalur. She sustained a fracture dislocation of right shoulder, fracture neck of humerus and fracture greater tuberosity in a motor accident that occurred on November 4, 1999 at about 10 a.m. when the bus bearing Reg.No.KRN/3681 in which he was travelling along Chadayamangalam-Pallickal public road, toppled and fell down in to the canal below at Kallladathanny. Alleging negligence against the second respondent, the driver of the bus, the claimant filed the O.P. under Section 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act before the Tribunal claiming a compensation of Rs.1,50,000/-. 2. Respondents 1 and 2, the owner and the driver of the bus respectively, remained absent before the Tribunal. The third respondent, Insurance Company of the offending bus, filed a written MACA.No.805/2004 2 statement admitting the policy of the bus. 3. This O.P. was jointly tried along with several other O.Ps. filed by the other injured persons in the accident and a common award was passed. The first claimant was examined as PW17 and Exts.A72 and A73 series were marked on the side of the claimants. On the side of the contesting third respondent Ext.B1 was marked. On an appreciation of evidence, the Tribunal awarded a compensation of Rs. 31,468/- with interest @ 6% 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. 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 second respondent is not challenged in this appeal. Therefore, the only question which arises for consideration is whether the claimants are entitled to any enhanced compensation. 6. The break up of the compensation awarded by the Tribunal MACA.No.805/2004 3 is as under : Loss of earning - Rs. 3,000/- Transportation expenses - Rs. 1,000/- Extra nourishment - Rs. 1,000/- Bystander expenses - Rs. 1,000/- Medical expenses - Rs. 308/- Pain and suffering - Rs. 5,000/- Disability - Rs.20,160/- 7. Counsel for the claimant sought enhancement of the compensation for the disability caused and for medical expenses. 8. The Tribunal took the monthly income of the claimant as Rs. 1500/- and took the percentage of disability as 7% and adopted a multiplier of 17 and awarded Rs.20,160/- for the disability caused. The claimant was aged 36 at the time of the accident. As a tailor, she used to earn Rs.3,000/- per month, according to her. Therefore, we feel that her monthly income can be reasonably fixed at Rs. 1,750/-. In Ext.A72, certificate of disability, it is noted that claimant has suffered a disability of 12% which appears to be reasonable in the light of the fact that she has undergone 41 days inpatient treatment for post traumatic stiffness of right shoulder in the Centre for Rehabilitation Care and Research, Thiruvananthapuram. The multiplier of 17 adopted by the MACA.No.805/2004 4 Tribunal is not seriously challenged. Thus calculated for the disability caused, the claimant is entitled to a compensation of Rs. 42,840/- ( 12% x 1750 x 12 x 17). Thus on this count, the claimant is entitled to an additional compensation of Rs. 22,680/-. 9. Towards medical expenses, the Tribunal awarded Rs. 308/-. The Tribunal has discarded Ext.A73 series bills as there was no office seal on the same. Taking into consideration the nature of the injury sustained by the claimant and the period of treatment undergone by her, we feel that a compensation of Rs. 10,000/- would be reasonable for the medical expenses incurred by her. Thus on this count, the claimant is entitled to an additional compensation of Rs.9692/-. As regards the compensation awarded under other heads, we find the same to be reasonable and therefore are not disturbing the same. 10. There is another aspect in this case. The Tribunal awarded interest only @ 6% per annum which appears to be very low. The claimants are entitled to interest @ 7.5% per annum from the date of petition till realisation for the compensation already awarded and also MACA.No.805/2004 5 for the enhanced compensation. 11. In the result, the claimant is found entitled to an additional compensation of Rs. 32,372/-. She is entitled to interest @ 7.5% per annum from the date of petition till realisation for the compensation already awarded and also for the enhanced compensation and proportionate cost. 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. 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.805/2004 6 MACA.No.805/2004 7 MACA.No.805/2004 8