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 22ND FEBRUARY 2011 / 3RD PHALGUNA 1932 MACA.No. 1638 of 2007() ----------------------- AGAINST THE ORDER IN OPMV.720/2000 of MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS TRIBUNAL, THALASSERY .................... APPELLANT(S): APPELLANT/PETITIONER ---------------------------------- SOUMYA JAYAKRISHNAN, W/O.DR.JAYAKRISHNAN, RESIDING AT C.K.HOUSE, TELLICHERRY-1. BY ADV. SRI.V.CHITAMBARESH, SENIOR ADVOCATE SRI.T.C.SURESH MENON SRI.JIBU P THOMAS RESPONDENT(S): RESPONDENTS -------------------------- 1. DR.K.SUDEEP, S/O.K.NARAYANAN, RESIDING AT PALAKUNNU, P.O.KARIVELLUR, PAYYANNUR. 2. RAJEEVAN K.V., S/O.BHASKARAN, C/O.DR.K.SUDEEP, RESIDING AT PALAKUNNU P.O.KARIVELLUR, PAYYANNUR. 3. THE NEW INDIA ASSURANCE COMPANY LIMITED, KANNUR. 4. MANAGING PARTNER, RAMESH NARAYANAN ASSOCIATES, C.K.HOUSE, TELLICHERRY-1. 5. DR.JAYAKRISHNAN C.K., S/O.NARAYANAN NAMBIAR, RESIDING AT C.K.HOUSE, TELLICHERRY-1. 6. UNITED INDIA INSURANCE COMPANY LIMITED, KANNUR. ADV. SRI.THOMAS MATHEW NELLIMOOTTIL FOR R3 THIS MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS APPEAL HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 22/02/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: A.K.BASHEER & P.Q.BARKATH ALI, JJ. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - M.A.C.A.No.1638 OF 2007 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Dated this the 22nd day of February, 2011 JUDGMENT Barkath Ali, J. Appellant is the claimant in O.P.(MV)No.720/2000 on the file of Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Thalassery. In this appeal she challenges the judgment and award of the Tribunal dated December 4, 2006 awarding a compensation of Rs.1,13,700/- for the loss caused to her on account of the injuries sustained by her in a motor accident. She sustained the following injuries in that accident that occurred on April 21, 1999 at about 12.15.p.m. : Abraded stellate laceration over the right cheek, infraorbital region, right temporal region, forehead including the eyebrow. Ectropion developed on right eye. 2. The accident happened while the claimant was travelling in the car bearing Reg.No.KL-13/D 8422 from Mysore to Coorg. When she reached at Bilikere Byepass road in Mysore, the car dashed against a Tata Sumo jeep bearing Reg.No.KL-13/C 5292 driven by second respondent. Alleging negligence against the second respondent, the MACA.No.1638/2007 2 claimant filed the O.P. before the Tribunal under Section 166 of Motor Vehicles Act claiming a compensation of Rs. 6,00,000/-. 3. Respondents 1 to 3 are the owner, driver and insurer of the offending jeep. Respondents 4 to 6 are the RC owner, driver and insurer of the car involved in the accident. Respondents 1 and 2 filed a joint written statement admitting the accident, but attributed negligence to the driver of the car. The third respondent, the insurer of the offending jeep filed a written statement admitting the policy. Respondents 4 to 6 remained absent before the Tribunal. 4. This O.P. was jointly tried along with the O.P. filed by the husband of the claimant who was also travelling in the car and sustained injuries in the accident and a common award was passed by the Tribunal. Pws 1 to 3 were examined and Exts.A1 to A30 and Ext.X1 were marked on the side of the claimant before the Tribunal. No evidence was adduced by the contesting third respondent. The Tribunal on an appreciation of evidence found that the accident occurred due to the rash and negligent driving of the offending car by second respondent and awarded a compensation of Rs. 1,13,700/- with MACA.No.1638/2007 3 interest @ 7% per annum from the date of petition till realisation and proportionate cost against respondents 1 to 3. 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 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 Tribunal awarded a total compensation of Rs.1,13,700/- .The break up of the compensation amount awarded is as under: Transportation expenses - Rs. 6,000/- Medical expenses - Rs.62,138/- Bystander expenses - Rs. 3,750/- Extra nourishment - Rs. 1,500/- Pain and suffering - Rs.25,000/- Disability - Rs.15,300/- 8. Counsel for the claimant sought enhancement of MACA.No.1638/2007 4 compensation for the disability caused . He pointed out that no compensation was awarded for loss of amenities, for loss of marital prospects and for disfigurement caused. 9. The Tribunal took the monthly income of the claimant as Rs.1,500/- and took the percentage of disability as 5% and adopted a multiplier of 17 as she was aged 22 years and awarded Rs.15,300/- for the disability caused. According to the claimant, she was a student in N.S.S. Engineering College at the time of the accident. Taking into consideration her future prospects in life, we feel that the notional monthly income of the claimant can be reasonably fixed at Rs. 2,500/-. In Ext.A21 disability certificate, the doctor has assessed her disability at 40%. The doctor who issued Ext.A21 was examined as PW3. He deposed that the claimant had extensive loss of skin over her eyelid, eyebrow and cheek for which multiple surgeries has been done. She has residual extensive scarring of the face especially right eyebrow, upper eyelid, cheek and forehead. The scars are of permanent nature. She had a residual ectropion of upper lid which prevents completed closure of the eye. She has a quite disfiguring hairless scar on her MACA.No.1638/2007 5 eyebrow. She was a dancer which is proved by Exts.A27 and A30. Taking into consideration the above aspect, we feel that the percentage of disability caused to the claimant can be assessed at 20%. The multiplier of 17 taken by the Tribunal is not seriously challenged. Thus calculated for the disability caused, the claimant is entitled to a compensation of Rs.1,02,000/- ( 20% x 2500 x 12 x 17). Thus on this count, the claimant is entitled to an additional compensation of Rs.86,700/-. 10. No amount is seen awarded for loss of amenities and enjoyment in life and for disfigurement caused to the claimant. Taking into consideration the nature of the injuries sustained by the claimant, we feel that a compensation of Rs.50,000/- for loss of amenities and enjoyment in life and Rs.20,000/- for disfigurement caused 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. 11. In the result, the claimant is found entitled to an additional compensation of Rs. 1,56,700/-. She is entitled to interest @ 7% per MACA.No.1638/2007 6 annum from the date of petition till realisation and proportionate cost. The third 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.1638/2007 7