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 15TH JUNE 2010 / 25TH JYAISTHA 1932 MACA.No. 527 of 2010() ---------------------- OPMV.693/2006 of MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS TRIBUNAL, KALPETTA .................... APPELLANT(S): PETITIONER ------------------------ HASEENA, AGED 26 YEARS, W/O. SUBAIR, KURIKKAL HOUSE, P.O.KUPPADI, SULTHAN BATHERY, WAYANAD DISTRICT. BY ADV. SMT.CELINE JOSEPH RESPONDENT(S): RESPONDENT ------------------------- THE MANAGER, ORIENTAL INSURANCE CO. LTD., NO.7 UTHMAT GANDHI SALAI, 2ND FLOOR, ROSY TOWERS, NANGAMBAKKAM, CHENNAI, TAMIL NADU-600 034. (INSURER OF KL-10/P 7090 BUS) POLICY NO.411300/31/2006/14934 ADV. SRI.MATHEWS JACOB, SENIOR ADVOCATE SRI.P.JACOB MATHEW THIS MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS APPEAL HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 15/06/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: A.K.BASHEER & P.Q.BARKATH ALI, JJ. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - M.A.C.A.No.527 OF 2010 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Dated this the 15th 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.693/2006 of Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Kalpetta challenges the judgment and award of the Tribunal dated August 20, 2009 awarding a compensation of Rs. 6,98,700/- for the loss caused to her on account of the injuries sustained by her in a motor accident. 2. The facts leading to this appeal in brief are these : The claimant was a lady coolie worker aged 26 at the time of the accident. According to her, she used to earn Rs. 4,500/- per month. On September 21, 2006 when the claimant was travelling in a bus bearing Reg.No.KL 10/P 1090 driven by the first respondent, the bus hit on a tree on the side of the road and overturned. The claimant sustained severe injuries on the spinal code and became paraplegic. According to the claimant, accident occurred due to the rash and negligent driving of MACA.No.527/2010 2 the offending bus by first respondent. First respondent as the driver cum owner, second respondent as the insurer of the offending bus are jointly and severally liable to pay compensation to the claimant. 3. First respondent, the owner cum driver of the of the offending bus, remained absent and was set ex parte by the Tribunal. The second respondent the insurer of the offending bus filed a written statement admitting the policy. 4. Exts.A1 to A12 were marked on the side of the claimant before the Tribunal. Ext.C1, the certificate of disability, was also marked on her side. No evidence was adduced by the contesting second respondent. The Tribunal on an appreciation of evidence found that the accident occurred due to the rash and negligent driving of the offending bus by first respondent and awarded a compensation of Rs. 6,98,700/- 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 MACA.No.527/2010 3 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 first 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 fracture on the spinal code and became paraplegic. Ext.A5, the certificate of disability shows that she was totally paraplegic with bladder and bowel involvement. She is bed ridden and can be ambulant only in a wheel chair. Her permanent disability was assessed at 75%. 8. The Tribunal awarded a total compensation of Rs.6,98,700/-. The break up of the compensation awarded is as under : Loss of earnings for one year - Rs. 42,000/- Transport to hospital - Rs. 18,000/- Extra nourishment - Rs. 3,000/- Damage to clothing and articles - Rs. 1,000/- Medical expenses - Rs. 21,000/- Bystander's expenses - Rs. 24,500/- Loss of amenities - Rs. 30,000/- Compensation for pain and suffering - Rs. 30,000/- Compensation for permanent disability - Rs.5,29,200/- MACA.No.527/2010 4 9. Counsel for the claimant sought enhancement of compensation awarded for the disability caused, pain and suffering endured, loss of amenities and enjoyment of life and future treatment expenses. 10. The Tribunal took the monthly income of the claimant as Rs. 3,500/-, adopted a multiplier of 18 and took her disability as 70% and awarded Rs. 5,29,200/- for the disability caused which appears to be reasonable. Therefore, towards disability caused, she is not entitled to any enhanced compensation. 11. The Tribunal awarded Rs. 30,000/- for loss of amenities and enjoyment of life and Rs. 30,000/- for pain and suffering endured. Taking into consideration the fact that she was totally paraplegic, we feel that a compensation of Rs. 50,000/- under each of the above count would be reasonable. 12. Counsel for the claimant pointed out that no compensation was awarded for future treatment expenses. As the claimant is paraplegic, considerable amount will have to be spent for future treatment expenses. In the circumstances of the case, we feel that a MACA.No.527/2010 5 compensation of Rs. 50,000/- would be reasonable on this count. As regards the compensation awarded under other heads, we find the same to be reasonable and therefore are not disturbing the same. 13. In the result, the claimant is entitled to an additional compensation of Rs. 90,000/-. She is entitled to interest @ 7.5% per annum from the date of petition till realisation and proportionate cost. The second 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.527/2010 6