IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE M.N.KRISHNAN MONDAY, THE 14TH SEPTEMBER 2009 / 23RD BHADRA 1931 MACA.No. 870 of 2004(C) --------------------------------- OPMV.1436/1998 of MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS TRIBUNAL, TRIVANDRUM .................... APPELLANT/APPLICANT: --------------------------------------- T.MANIYAN, S/O.THANKAPPAN PILLAI, KARITHALAKKAL VEEDU, PALAPUR, VELLAYANI P.O., THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. BY ADV. SRI.T.M.CHANDRAN RESPONDENTS/RESPONDENTS: ---------------------------------------------- 1. MRS.RUPPILA SAHNI, W/O.MANGAL SAHNI, R.92 NEW COLONY, GURGON, DELHI. 2. MAKKAN SINGH, S/O.K.SINGH, JADISHPUR SUTTANPUR, DELHI. 3. M/S.NEW INDIA ASSURANCE CO.LTD., REPRESENTED BY ITS BRANCH MANAGER, BRANCH OFFICE, DELHI. 4. THE MANAGING DIRECTOR, KERALA STATE ROAD TRANSPORT CORPORATION, TRANSPORT BHAVAN, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 5. K.B.SIDDIQUE, S/O.K.M.BEERA, KOTHYIL HOUSE, ERAYAD, KODUNGALLOOR. ADV. SRI.V.V.NANDAGOPAL NAMBIAR, SC, KSRTC FOR R4 THIS MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS APPEAL HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 14/09/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: M.N. KRISHNAN, J. =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-= M.A.C.A.No. 870 of 2004 =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-= Dated this the 14th day of September, 2009 JUDGMENT Notice to respondents 1 and 2 is dispensed with for the reason that the Insurance Company has admitted the policy and the challenge is only against the quantum. 2. This is an appeal preferred against the award of the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Thiruvananthapuram in O.P.(MV) No.1436 of 1998. The claimant, a 28 year old man a tourist taxi driver by profession, sustained injuries in a road accident and the Tribunal found that the accident had taken place on account of the negligence of the 2nd respondent lorry driver. The Insurance Company of the lorry has admitted insurance policy. The Tribunal has awarded compensation of Rs.11,000/- which is a mistake and could be only Rs.10,000/-, as seen from calculation. It is against that decision, the claimant has come up in appeal. 3. I perused the award and heard the learned counsel. A perusal would reveal that immediately after the accident, the claimant was taken to the Government Hospital at Karunagappally and on account of a suspected MACA 870/04 2 head injury, he was referred to the Medical College Hospital. He was treated there as an inpatient from 16-1-1998 to 27-1-1998. He sustained injury over the right side of the frontal region on the left cheek, right hip and on the right shoulder. Again he was readmitted in the Medical College Hospital on 6-2-1998 and discharged on 14-2-1998. There skin grafting was done. So, altogether he was in the hospital for 19 days. The Tribunal awarded him Rs.1,000/- towards medical expenses, Rs.500/- towards transportation to hospital,Rs.500/- towards extra nourishment and Rs.8,000/- towards compensation for pain and suffering. It would come to Rs.10,000/-. 4. It can be seen that there had been a prolonged hospitalizations and the injuries, resulted in skin grafting over the wound on the right shoulder. So, necessarily the claimant would have suffered agonizing pain and more apprehension also for the reason that he had suspected head injury over the scalp right side frontal region. Therefore, Rs.2,000/- more is granted towards pain and suffering. At least he would have been prevented from doing any work for 6 to 8 weeks and therefore, I award Rs.3,000/- towards loss of earning. Considering the long period of hospitalization and innumerable number of visits to the hospital, I enhance hospitalization expenses by Rs.1,000/-. The claimant thus is entitled to an MACA 870/04 3 additional amount of Rs.6,000/-, which would make the total Rs.16,000/-. Since the claimant has been by mistake awarded Rs.11,000/-, he will be entitled to get Rs.5,000/- more with 7.5% interest per annum on the additional compensation. 5. In the result, the appeal is partly allowed and the claimant is awarded an additional compensation of Rs.5,000/- with 7.5% interest on the said sum from the date of the petition till realization and the 3rd respondent Insurance Company is directed to deposit the said amount within a period of 60 days from the date of receipt of copy of this judgment. M.N.KRISHNAN, JUDGE. mn.