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 9TH APRIL 2010 / 19TH CHAITHRA 1932 MACA.No. 356 of 2010() ---------------------- OPMV.2020/2005 of MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS TRIBUNAL, KOTTAYAM .................... APPELLANT(S): PETITIONER -------------- KOCHUMOL, IYYRUMALA VEEDU PAMPADY VILLAGE, KOTTAYAM. BY ADV. SRI.M.V.THAMBAN SRI.R.REJI SRI.B.BIPIN RESPONDENT(S): RESPONDENTS --------------- 1. BABU ALEX, TAIKADAVIL (H) PANGADA PO,KOTTAYAM. 2. SUBIN ALEX, TAIKADAVIL (H) PANGADA PO,KOTTAYAM. 3. THE UNITED INDIA INSURANCE CO.LTD KOTTAYAM. ADV. SRI.ARUN.B.VARGHESE FOR R1-2 SRI.A.A.MOHAMMED NAZIR FOR R3 THIS MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS APPEAL HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 09/04/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: A.K. BASHEER & P.Q. BARKATH ALI, JJ. ------------------------------------------------------ M.A.C.A. 356 of 2010 ------------------------------------------------------ Dated: APRIL 9, 2010 JUDGMENT Barkath Ali, J. In this appeal under sec.173 of the Motor Vehicles Act the claimant in OP(MV) 2020/2005 of the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Kottayam, challenges the judgment and award of the Tribunal dated August 12, 2008 awarding a compensation of Rs.50,432/- for the loss caused to the claimant on account of the injuries sustained in a motor accident. 2. The facts leading to this appeal in brief are these: On October 19, 2004, at about 3.55 p.m. while the claimant was walking along the side of the road near NSS Paddy Bhagam, he was knocked down by a motorcycle bearing registration No. KL 5Q 9380 ridden by the 2nd respondent. He sustained serious injuries. According to the claimant the accident occurred due to the rash and negligent riding of the offending motorcycle by the 2nd respondent. The 1st respondent as the owner, the 2nd respondent as the rider and the 3rd respondent as the insurer of the offending motorcycle are jointly and severally liable to pay compensation to the claimant. The claimant claimed a compensation of Rs.1,50,000/-. 3. Respondents 1 and 2 - the owner and the rider respectively M.A.C.A. 356 of 2010 2 of the offending motorcycle - filed a written statement admitting the accident, but denying the liability. The 3rd respondent, insurer of the offending motorcycle, filed a written statement admitting the policy. 4. Exts.A1 to A10 were marked on the side of the claimant before the Tribunal. Exts.B1 to B4 were marked on the side of the contesting respondents. On an appreciation of evidence the Tribunal awarded a compensation of Rs.50,432/-. 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 2nd 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 is a lady aged 29 doing tailoring work. According to her she used to earn Rs.2500/- per month. She has sustained a cervical spine injury and fracture of left leg. But the X-ray showed there was no fracture on the leg. Ext.A9 certificate shows that the claimant has suffered permanent disability of 10%. M.A.C.A. 356 of 2010 3 8. The Tribunal awarded a total compensation of Rs.50,432/-. The break up of the compensation awarded is as under:- Loss of earning for two months - - Rs. 5,000/- transportation to hospital - 500/- Medical expenses - 2,632/- Extra nourishment & Bystander's expenses - 1,000/- Damage to clothing - 300/- Compensation for pain and suffering - 10,000/- Compensation for permanent disability (2500 x 12 x 18 x 5/100) - 27,000/- Compensation for loss of amenities and - 3,000/- inconvenience, if any. 9. As regards the compensation for loss of amenities and enjoyment of life, we feel that Rs.3000/- awarded by the Tribunal is very low. Taking into consideration the nature of the injuries sustained, we feel that a compensation of Rs.10,000/- will be reasonable on this count. As regards the compensation awarded under other heads, we find the same to be reasonable and therefore we are not disturbing the same. 10. Therefore the appellant/claimant is entitled to an additional compensation of Rs. 7000/-. She is entitled to interest @ 9% per annum from the date of petition till realisation. 11. There is another aspect in this case. There was a delay of M.A.C.A. 356 of 2010 4 405 days in filing this appeal. Therefore for that period the claimant is not entitled to any interest. The 3rd 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 with notice to 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 mt/-