IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE A.K.BASHEER & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.Q.BARKATH ALI THURSDAY, THE 28TH OCTOBER 2010 / 6TH KARTHIKA 1932 MACA.No. 1980 of 2010() ----------------------- OPMV.1274/2007 of MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS TRIBUNAL, PALAKKAD .................... APPELLANT(S): PETITIONER ------------------------ ARUMUGAN, S/O.KANDAN, AGED 52 YEARS, NADAKKAVU, KAKKAYAR, KODUVAYOOR P.O., PALAKKAD. BY ADV. SRI.K.P.BALAGOPAL RESPONDENT(S): RESPONDENTS -------------------------- 1. MAJEED, S/O.CHELLAPPA RAWTHER, AGE NOT KNOWN, KUNNIL VEEDU, KARIMKULAM, ELAVANCHERRY, PALAKKAD. 2. SHAKEER.M., S/O.MAJEED, AGED 25 YEARS, KUNNIL VEEDU, KARIMKULAM, ELAVANCHERRY, PALAKKAD. 3. THE ORIENTAL INSURANCE CO.LTD., SHOBA TSM COMPLEX, RAILWAY STATION ROAD, PALAKKAD. THIS MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS APPEAL HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 28/10/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: A.K.BASHEER & P.Q.BARKATH ALI, JJ. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - M.A.C.A.No.1980 OF 2010 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Dated this the 28th day of October, 2010 JUDGMENT Barkath Ali, J. Appellant is the claimant in O.P.(MV)No.1274/2007 on the file of Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Palakkad. He sustained the following injuries in a motor accident that occurred on May 28, 2007: Lacerated wound and contusion right shoulder, lacerated wound lower lip, fracture right femur and lacerated wound right foot dorsum. 2. The accident happened while the claimant was pillion riding on the motor cycle bearing Reg.No. KL9/B-5309, he was knocked down by the autorickshaw bearing Reg.No.KL9/S-7390 driven by the second respondent. Alleging negligence against the second respondent, the claimant filed the O.P. before the Tribunal under Section 166 of Motor Vehicles Act claiming a compensation of Rs. 1,40,000/-. 3. First respondent, the owner of the offending autorickshaw though entered appearance did not file any written statement. Second MACA.No.1980/2010 2 respondent, the driver of the offending autorickshaw filed written statement admitting the accident and further contended that the accident occurred due to the negligence of the rider of the motor cycle. The third respondent, the insurer of the offending autorickshaw filed a written statement admitting the policy. 4. Exts.A1 to A15 were marked on the side of the claimant before the Tribunal. No evidence was adduced by contesting respondents. The Tribunal on an appreciation of evidence found that the accident occurred due to the rash and negligent driving of the offending autorickashw by second respondent and awarded a compensation of Rs. 60,700/- with interest @ 7.5% per annum from the date of petition till realisation and proportionate cost. 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 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 MACA.No.1980/2010 3 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 break up of the compensation awarded is as under : Medical expenses - Rs.3,500/- Transportation - Rs.1,000/- Extra nourishment - Rs.1,000/- Damage to clothing - Rs. 500/- Pain and suffering - Rs.18,000/- Loss of amenities - Rs. 7,000/- Disability - Rs.29,700/- 8. Counsel for the claimant sought enhancement of compensation for the disability caused. 9. The Tribunal took the monthly income of the claimant as Rs.2,500/-, took the percentage of disability as 9% as certified by the Medical Board in Ext.X1, adopted a multiplier of 11 and awarded Rs. 29,700/- for the disability caused. As there is no evidence to show the income of the claimant, the Tribunal is perfectly justified in taking the monthly income of the claimant as Rs. 2,500/-. Taking into consideration the nature of the injury sustained by the claimant , we feel that the compensation awarded by the Tribunal for the disability MACA.No.1980/2010 4 caused and on other heads is just and reasonable. That being so, the claimant is not entitled to any enhanced compensation. Therefore, the appeal has to be dismissed. In the result, the appeal is dismissed. A.K.BASHEER, JUDGE P.Q.BARKATH ALI, JUDGE sv. MACA.No.1980/2010 5