IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE A.K.BASHEER & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.Q.BARKATH ALI WEDNESDAY, THE 23RD JUNE 2010 / 2ND ASHADHA 1932 MACA.No. 220 of 2006(Y) ----------------------- OPMV.285/2003 of MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS TRIBUNAL, THODUPUZHA .................... APPELLANT(S): APPELLANT/PETITIONER. ----------------------------------- BHAGYOM, S/O.KUMARAN, AGED 23 YEARS, RESIDING AT CHAKKANANICKAL HOUSE, KORANGATTI PO, ADIMALY. BY ADV. SRI.K.JAJU BABU SMT.M.U.VIJAYALAKSHMI RESPONDENT(S): RESPONDENTS. --------------------------- 1. P.V.VIDHYADHARAN, PARAYIL HOUSE, PAPPINISSERY, KANNUR. 2. PUSHPAKARAN, S/O.GANGADHANAN, ALAPPARAMBIL HOUSE, KALLYAR P.O. THODUPUZHA, (DELETED), 2ND RESPONDENT DELETED AS PER ORDER IA.2111/2003 DT.17/6/2004. 3. THE NEW INDIA ASSURANCE CO.LTD., THAVAKKARA, KANNUR. 4. THOMAS AUGUSTINE, VATTAKKAVUNGAL, CHINNAR, IDUKKI DISTRICT. 5. ABHILASH.E.R. ELAVANA HOUSE, CHINNAR, IDUKKI. 6. UNITED INDIA INSURANCE COMPANY LTD., KALLARKUTTY ROAD, ADIMALY. ADV. SRI.P.JAYASANKAR FOR R.3 THIS MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS APPEAL HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 23/06/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: A.K.BASHEER & P.Q.BARKATH ALI, JJ. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - M.A.C.A.No.220 OF 2006 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Dated this the 23rd day of June, 2010 JUDGMENT Barkath Ali, J. In this appeal under Section 173 of Motor Vehicles Act, the claimant in O.P.(MV)No.285/2003 of Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Thodupuzha challenges the judgment and award of the Tribunal dated July 25, 2005 awarding a compensation of Rs. 71,940/- ( mistakenly noted as Rs.68,000/-) for the loss caused to him on account of the injuries sustained in a motor accident. 2. The facts leading to this appeal in brief are these : The claimant was a coolie aged 23 at the time of the accident. On March 12, 2003 at about 11.30 a.m., he was travelling a bus bearing Reg.No.KL-6/3626 from Thopramkudy to Thodupuzha. When the bus reached near Vengalloor, a lorry bearing Reg.No.KL-13/C 7468 came at a high speed from the opposite side and dashed against the bus in which the claimant was travelling. The claimant sustained serious injuries. According to the claimant, accident occurred due to the rash MACA.No.220/2006 2 and negligent driving of the offending lorry by second respondent. First respondent as the registered owner, second respondent as the driver and third respondent as the insurer of the offending lorry are jointly and severally liable to pay compensation to the claimant. Respondents 4 to 6 are the registered owner, driver and insurer of the bus. 3. Only respondents 3 and 6, the insurers of the lorry and the bus respectively contested the matter. The others remained absent before the Tribunal. The name of the second respondent was deleted from the parry array at the request of the claimant. Respondents 3 and 6 filed separate written statements admitting the policy of the respective vehicles, but attributed negligence to the drivers of the other vehicle involved in the accident. 4. Claimant was examined as PW1 and Exts.A1 to A9 series were marked on the side of the claimant before the Tribunal. No evidence was adduced by contesting respondents 3 and 6 before the Tribunal. The Tribunal on an appreciation of evidence found that the accident occurred due to the rash and negligent driving of the offending MACA.No.220/2006 3 lorry by second respondent and awarded a compensation of Rs. 71940/- ( mistakenly noted as Rs.68,000/-) with interest @ 6% per annum from the date of petition till realisation against respondents 1 to 3. 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 Companies. 6. 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 claimant is entitled to any enhanced compensation. 7. The claimant sustained the following injuries as revealed from Ext.A6, copy of the wound certificate issued from Chazhikattu hospital,Thodupuzha. 1. Fracture of proximal phalanx of right thumb. 2. Fracture of second and third right metacarpals. 3. Fracture of lower end of right humerus and fracture of right ulna ( elbow) with laceration. Ext.A7 is the certificate issued from the hospital. He was admitted on MACA.No.220/2006 4 12/03/2003 and was discharged on 27/03/2003. In Ext.A8, the certificate issued by the Medical Board, his disability is shown as 30%. He has ankylosis on the right elbow and there was only mild movements of elbow and right forearm. 8. The Tribunal awarded a total compensation of Rs.71,940/- ( mistakenly noted as Rs.68,000/-). The break up of the compensation awarded is as under : Loss of earning - Rs. 5,000/- Treatment expenses - Rs. 13,300/- Bystander expenses - Rs. 3,000/- Transportation - Rs. 2,000/- Extra nourishment - Rs. 1,000/- Pain and suffering - Rs. 15,000/- Disability - Rs. 32,640/- 9. Counsel for the claimant sought enhancement of compensation for the disability caused. 10. The Tribunal took the monthly income of the claimant as Rs. 2,000/-, adopted a multiplier of 16 and percentage of disability as 8% and awarded Rs. 32,640/- for the disability caused. The claimant was a coolie aged 23 at the time of the accident. Therefore, we feel that his monthly income can be reasonably estimated at Rs.2,500/-. The MACA.No.220/2006 5 multiplier adopted by the Tribunal as 17 is not seriously challenged. Taking into account Ext.A8, the certificate of disability, we feel that the percentage of disability can be assessed at 12%. Thus calculated for the disability caused, the claimant is entitled to a compensation of Rs.61,200/- ( 2500 x 12 x 17 x 12%). Thus on this count, the claimant is entitled to an additional compensation of Rs. 28,560/-. As regards the compensation awarded under other heads, we find the same to be reasonable and therefore are not disturbing the same. 11. There is another aspect in this case. The Tribunal awarded interest only @ 6% per annum which appears to be very low. The claimant 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. 12. In the result, the award of the Tribunal is corrected as Rs. 71,940/-. The claimant is entitled to an additional compensation of Rs. 28,560/-. He 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. He is also entitled to MACA.No.220/2006 6 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.220/2006 7