IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE J.B.KOSHY & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE THOMAS P.JOSEPH THURSDAY, THE 6TH NOVEMBER 2008 / 15TH KARTHIKA 1930 MACA.No. 2395 of 2008(F) ------------------------------------- OP(MV).NO.1760/2004 OF MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS TRIBUNAL, KOTTAYAM. .................... APPELLANT/ 3RD RESPONDENT: ----------------------------------------------- NATIONAL INSURANCE CO.LTD., D.O.KOTTAYAM, REPRESENTED BY THE MANAGER, KOCHI REGIONAL OFFICE, M.G.ROAD, KOCHI-35. BY ADV. SRI.E.M.JOSEPH. RESPONDENT/ CLAIMANT AND RESPONDENTS 1 AND 2: --------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 1. VARGHESE P.THOMAS @ ABILASH, AGED 26, S/O.THOMAS, PAYYAMPALLIL HOUSE, POOTHAKUZHY P.O., PAMPADY VILLAGE, KOTTAYAM, 2. MATHEW,S/O.VARGHESE MATHEW, MARAGADU PUTHUPARAMPIL, CHANGANACHERRY. 3. VINOD, S/O.GOPALAN, POOVANKAL VEEDU, NALUMUKKU BHAGAM, ERATTAYAR,IDUKKI. BY THIS MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS APPEAL HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 06/11/2008,THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: prv. J.B.KOSHY & THOMAS P. JOSEPH, JJ. -------------------------------------- M.A.C.A.NO.2395 OF 2008 ------------------------------------- Dated this the 6th day of November, 2008 J U D G M E N T Koshy,J. This appeal is filed by the Insurance company questioning the award of the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Kottayam, in OP(M.V).No.1760/2004. Claimant in that case sustained very serious injuries in a motor accident on 26.1.2004. He claimed Rs.10 lakhs as compensation contending that accident occurred due to the negligence of the driver of the bus insured by the appellant - Insurance company. Only dispute raised by the Insurance company is regarding the quantum of compensation. Tribunal awarded a total compensation of Rs.9,90,200/-. Out of that, Rs.2,50,000/- was for treatment expenses based on actual bills. The claimant was only 26 years old at the time of accident. His right leg was amputated at thigh level, that is, above knee. He MACA.NO.2395/2008 2 owned a lorry and he was also a driver by profession. To prove the same, driving licence, badge and disc were produced as Exts.A8 to A10. So, he was a youngster who owns a lorry and he was driving the same. As far as the claimant is concerned, his earning capacity is completely lost. Unlike in 163 A claims, compensation need not be restricted considering the Schedule in Workmen's Compensation claims. The question is what are the after effects of the accident. As far as the claimant is concerned, he will not be able to drive the lorry. Accident occurred at the age of 26. He has to suffer the disability through out his life. In this connection, we also refer to the decision of this Court in Jayaprasad v. Rejimon Philip and another (2007 (4) KLT 623)). The Honourable Supreme Court has also held in Janardhan v. United India Insurance Co. Ltd. (2008 (2) KLT 995 (SC)) that amputation of leg of a tanker driver will entail 100% loss of earning capacity. However, we also note that even if he may be able to do some work by using artificial leg, it will costs a huge amount and the artificial leg has to be replaced subsequently. Only Rs.25,000/- was awarded for MACA.NO.2395/2008 3 artificial leg by the Tribunal and according to the claimant, he is the owner of Tata 407 mini lorry. Ext.A14 is the copy of the RC book. According to him, he was getting Rs.6,000/- per month. When a driver of a lorry himself owns a lorry, he will surely get more than Rs.200/- to Rs.350/- per day. He claimed Rs.6,000/- as the monthly income which is not excessive. But Tribunal calculated compensation only taking Rs.3,000/-. In the above circumstances, considering the nature of the injuries and total compensation awarded, we are of the view that no interference is required in the amount awarded, and hence, this appeal is dismissed. J.B.KOSHY, JUDGE THOMAS P. JOSEPH, JUDGE prp