IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE A.K.BASHEER & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.Q.BARKATH ALI WEDNESDAY, THE 22ND DECEMBER 2010 / 1ST POUSHA 1932 MACA.No. 614 of 2005() ---------------------- OPMV.571/1999 of MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS TRIBUNAL, KOTTAYAM .................... APPELLANT(S): APPELLANT/PETITIONER ---------------------------------- JOSE, S/O.JOSEPH, MUNDACKAL HOUSE, ATHIRAMPUZHA P.O., KOTTAYAM (DISTRICT). BY ADV. SRI.M.P.MADHAVANKUTTY RESPONDENTS/RESPONDENTS --------------- 1. V.V.SURESH KUMAR, MANAGER, 20TH CENTURY FINANCE CORPORATION (LTD.) 95A, VAISHNAW COMPLEX, RACE COURCE, COIMBATORE-18, TAMIL NADU (DELETED) 2. JOSHY, S/O.MONCY ABRAHAM, POOVATHUMOOTTIL, VELIYATHUNADU, U.C.COLLEGE P.O., ALUVA-2. 3. THE MANAGER, NATIONAL INSURANCE CO.LTD., COIMBATORE. FIRST RESPONDENT IS DELETED FROM THE PARTY ARRAY VIDE ORDER DATED 10-12-2010 IN I.A.NO.3173/2010 ADV. SRI.P.JACOB MATHEW FOR R3 THIS MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS APPEAL HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 22/12/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: A.K.BASHEER & P.Q.BARKATH ALI, JJ. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - M.A.C.A.No.614 OF 2005 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Dated this the 22nd day of December, 2010 JUDGMENT Barkath Ali, J. Appellant is the claimant in O.P.(MV)No.571/1999 on the file of Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Kottayam. In this appeal, he challenges the judgment and award of the Tribunal dated November 29, 2003 awarding a compensation of Rs.1,42,000/- for the loss caused to him on account of the injuries sustained by him in a motor accident. He sustained the following injuries in that accident that occurred on May 26, 1997 at about 3.30 a.m. at Kuravilangadu: Fracture medial condyle humerus, fracture humerus and fracture olecrean. Tender cut injuries. 2. The accident happened while the claimant was travelling in a Tata Sumo bearing Reg.No.TN 38 C 2959 driven by second respondent. Due to the negligence of the second respondent, the vehicle hit against a wall on the side of the road and overturned. Alleging negligence against the second respondent, the claimant filed the O.P. before the Tribunal under Section 166 of Motor Vehicles Act MACA.No.614/2005 2 claiming a compensation of Rs. 4,00,000/-. 3. Respondents 1 and 2, the owner and the driver of the offending Tata Sumo van remained absent before the Tribunal. The third respondent, the insurer of the offending vehicle filed a written statement admitting the policy. 4. Exts.A1 to A25 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 Tata Sumo van by second respondent and awarded a compensation of Rs. 1,42,000/- with interest @ 9% per annum from the date of petition till realisation and a cost of Rs. 3,500/-. 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.614/2005 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 Tribunal awarded a total compensation of Rs.1,42,000/-. The break up of the compensation awarded by the Tribunal is as under : Loss of earnings - Rs. 14,000/- Medical bills - Rs. 83,500/- Bystander expenses - Rs. 2,000/- Transportation - Rs. 1,000/- Extra nourishment - Rs. 1,500/- Pain and suffering - Rs. 15,000/- Loss of amenities - Rs. 25,000/- ------------------ Rs.1,42,000/- =========== 8. Counsel for the claimant pointed out that no compensation was awarded by the Tribunal for the disability caused. We find force in the above contention. In Ext.A16 the doctor has certified that claimant has suffered a permanent disability of 25%. Ext.A21 is his photo. Therefore we feel that the claimant is entitled to compensation for the disability caused. 9. The claimant was aged 47 at the time of accident. MACA.No.614/2005 4 According to him, he was employed in a company in gulf as Mechanist earning Rs. 20,000/- per month. Ext.A7 is his passport. Ext.A12 is his trade certificate. Ext.A10 is the copy of his Bank pass book. Taking into consideration the above aspect, we feel that the monthly income of the claimant can be reasonably fixed at Rs. 4,000/-. As the claimant was aged 47, a multiplier of 13 can be adopted in this case. In Ext.A16, the doctor certified that the claimant has a permanent disability of 25%. Taking into consideration the disabilities caused to the claimant, as mentioned in Ext.A16 we are of the view that the percentage of disability can be fixed at 10%. Thus, calculated for the disability caused, the claimant is entitled to a compensation of Rs. 62,400/- ( 4000 x 12 x 13 x 10%) . As regards the compensation awarded under heads, we find the same to be reasonable and therefore we are not disturbing the same. 10. In the result, the claimant is found entitled to an additional compensation of Rs. 62,400/-. He is entitled to interest @ 9% per annum from the date of petition till realisation and proportionate cost. The third respondent being the insurer of the offending vehicle shall MACA.No.614/2005 5 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.