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 18TH MAY 2010 / 28TH VAISAKHA 1932 MACA.No. 549 of 2007(F) ----------------------------------- (O.P(MV).NO.925/2001 DTD. 27/07/2006 OF MOTOR ACCIDENTS CLAIMS TRIBUNAL, IRINJALAKUDA) .................... APPELLANT/PETITIONER IN O.P(MV): ------------------------------------------------------ JOSEPH, S/O. DEVASSY, MARATHAMPILLYIL HOUSE, RESIDING AT KOODAPUZHA DESOM, CHALAKUDY VILLAGE, CHALAKUDY P.O., MUKUNDAPURAM TALUK, THRISSUR DISTRICT. BY ADVS. SRI.P.V.BABY, SRI.A.N.SANTHOSH. RESPONDENTS/RESPONDENTS IN O.P(MV): --------------------------------------------------------------- 1. K.K.RATHEESH, S/O. KARUNAKARAN, KULAKUNNATH HOUSE, SOUTH KANDAZHY P.O., THRISSUR. 2. VARGHESE, S/O. OUSEPH, ARIMPILLY HOUSE, POTTA P.O. 3. MANAGER, NATIONAL INSURANCE CO. LTD., PALAKKAD. R3 BY ADV. SRI.E.M.JOSEPH. THIS MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS APPEAL HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 18/05/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: prv. A.K.BASHEER & P.Q. BARKATH ALI, JJ. =~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~==~=~=~= M.A.C.A. No. 549 of 2007 =~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~==~=~=~= Dated this the 18th day of May, 2010 JUDGMENT Barkath Ali, J. In this appeal under section 173 of the Motor Vehicles Act claimant in O.P.(MV) No.925 of 2001 of the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Irinjalakuda challenges the award of the Tribunal dated July 27, 2006, awarding a compensation of Rs.4,81,488/- for the loss caused to the claimant, on account of the injury sustained by him in a motor accident. 2. The facts leading to this appeal, in brief, are these:- The claimant was a factory worker, aged 40 at the time of the accident and used to earn Rs.3,000/- per month, according to the claimant. On January 24, 2001 while the claimant was walking along the Koodapuzha – Elinjipra public road and reached near Koodapuzha – Pallipuram MACA 549/07 2 Bridge, an auto rickshaw bearing registration No.KL-8/Q 4093, driven by the second respondent, came at a high speed and knocked him down. The claimant sustained very serious injuries and became paraplegia and suffered 100% permanent disability. According to the claimant, the accident occurred due to the rash and negligent driving of the offending auto rickshaw by the second respondent. The first respondent as the owner, the second respondent as the driver and third respondent as the insurer of the offending auto rickshaw are jointly and severally liable to pay the compensation to the claimant. The claimant claimed a compensation of Rs.12 lakhs. 3. The first respondent filed a written statement, contending that he has already sold the auto rickshaw to one Johnson and denying the liability. The second respondent, driver of the offending auto rickshaw, and third respondent, insurer of the offending vehicle, did not file any written statement. 4. PW1 was examined and Exts. A1 to A15 were MACA 549/07 3 marked on the side of the claimant. No evidence was adduced on the side of the respondents. The Tribunal, on an appreciation of the evidence, awarded a compensation of Rs.4,81,488/- with interest at the rate of 6% p.a. from the date of petition till realization. The claimant has come up in appeal, challenging the quantum of compensation awarded by the Tribunal. 5. Heard the learned counsel for the claimant and learned 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 second respondent, driver of the offending auto rickshaw, is not seriously challenged in this appeal. Therefore, the only question for consideration is whether the claimant is entitled to any enhanced compensation. 7. The claimant sustained unstable fracture D11 with complete paraplegia, transaction of the spinal cord at D11, contusion chest wall and abrasions all over the body. Ext.A6 MACA 549/07 4 is accident register cum wound certificate, Ext.A7 is a copy of discharge summary, Ext.A8 is the treatment certificate and Ext.A11 is the scan report. He was in the hospital for 245 days. It is seen from Ext.A1 that the claimant has functional difficulties such as no control of voidening urine and stool and that his both lower limbs are paralyzed. 8. The Tribunal awarded a total compensation of Rs.4,81,488/-. Break up of the compensation awarded is as under:- Transportation charges : Rs.1,000/- Extra nourishment and : Rs.24,500/- wages to attendants. Medical expenses : Rs.79,988/- Pain and suffering : Rs.25,000/- Loss of amenities : Rs.15,000/- and enjoyment of life. Permanent disability caused : Rs.3,36,000/- ------------------ Total : Rs.4,81,488/- ======= 9. The learned counsel for the appellant has mainly sought enhancement of compensation awarded under disability caused and for loss of amenities and enjoyment in MACA 549/07 5 life. The learned counsel pointed out that no compensation was awarded for future treatment expenses. 10. The Tribunal took monthly income of the claimant as Rs.1,750/-, adopted a multiplier of 16 and awarded a compensation of Rs.3,36,000/- for the disability caused. The claimant was a factory worker and used to earn Rs.3,000/- per month, as seen from Ext.A15 the salary certificate issued by his employer. No witness was examined to prove the same. We feel that in the light of Ext.A15 certificate, his monthly income can reasonably be fixed at Rs.2,500/-. The multiplier adopted by the Tribunal as 16 is not challenged in this appeal. Thus, calculate for the disability caused and for the consequential loss of earning power, the claimant is entitled to a compensation of Rs.4,80,000/- (Rs.2,500/- x 12 x 16). Thus, on this count, the claimant is entitled to an additional compensation of Rs.1,44,000/-. 11. The Tribunal awarded Rs.15,000/- for the loss of amenities and enjoyment in life, which, in our view, is quite MACA 549/07 6 inadequate. The claimant has now completely paralyzed. Therefore, we feel that a compensation of Rs.25,000/- would be reasonable on this count. Thus, on this count, the claimant is entitled to an additional compensation of Rs.10,000/-. 12. For future treatment expenses, no compensation was awarded by the Tribunal. The claimant is now completely paralyzed and huge amount is spent for treatment expenses. Therefore, towards future treatment expenses, we feel that a compensation of Rs.50,000/- would be reasonable. As regards the compensation awarded under other heads, we find the same to be reasonable and therefore, we are not disturbing the same. 13. In the result, the claimant is found entitled to an additional compensation of Rs.2,04,000/-. He is entitled to interest @ 7.5% from the date of petition till realization. The third respondent, being the insurer of the offending auto- rickshaw shall deposit the amount within two months from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment with notice to MACA 549/07 7 the claimant. 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. mn