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 19TH JANUARY 2011 / 29TH POUSHA 1932 MACA.No. 1004 of 2010() ----------------------- OPMV.1157/2002 of MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS TRIBUNAL, THALASSERY .................... APPELLANT(S): PETITIONER ------------------------ POYILIL SANTHOSH,S/O.KUNHIKANNAN, AGED 37 YEARS,ANUGRAHA AUTOMOBILES, KOMATH HOUSE, ELAYAVOOR AMSOM DESOM, PO MUNDAYAD, KANNUR. BY ADV. SRI.M.V.AMARESAN RESPONDENT(S): RESPONDENTS NO.3 ------------------------------- THE NEW INDIA ASSURANCE CO.LTD.,693/2,2ND FLOOR, NEAR MUNICIPAL BUS STAND, KANNUR-1. ADV. SRI.KKM.SHERIF FOR R1 SRI.A.A.ZIYAD RAHMAN FOR R1 THIS MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS APPEAL HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 19/01/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: A.K.BASHEER & P.Q.BARKATH ALI, JJ. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - M.A.C.A.No.1004 OF 2010 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Dated this the 19th day of January, 2011 JUDGMENT Barkath Ali, J. Appellant is the claimant in O.P.(MV)No.1157/2002 on the file of Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Thalassery. In this appeal he challenges the judgment and award of the Tribunal dated October 31,2009 awarding a compensation of Rs.1,39,000/- for the loss caused to him on account of the injuries sustained by him in a motor accident. He sustained fracture on left thigh bone and knee cap in that accident that occurred on July 14, 2002 at about 3.30 p.m. 2. The accident happened while the claimant was travelling in a tempo van bearing Reg.No.KRN 2910 from Pothuvachery to Kannur and when he reached at Mavilayi, it dashed against a coconut tree and capsized. Alleging negligence against the second respondent, the driver of the offending tempo van, the claimant filed the O.P. before the Tribunal under Section 166 of Motor Vehicles Act claiming a compensation of Rs. 5,00,000/-. MACA.No.1004/2010 2 3. Respondents 1 and 2, the owner and the driver of the offending tempo van filed a written statement before the Tribunal admitting the accident, but denied the liability. The third respondent, the insurer of the offending tempo van filed a written statement admitting the policy. 4. Pws 1 and 2 were examined and Exts.A1 to A9 series were marked on the side of the claimant before the Tribunal. No evidence was adduced by the contesting respondents. The Tribunal on an appreciation of evidence found that the accident occurred due to the rash and negligent driving of the offending tempo van by second respondent and awarded a compensation of Rs. 1,39,000/- with interest @ 7.5% per annum from the date of petition till realisation. 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.1004/2010 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.1,39,000/-.The break up of the compensation amount awarded is as under: Disability income - Rs. 51,840/- Medical expenses - Rs. 50,300/- Bystander's expenses - Rs. 1,700/- Loss of earnings - Rs. 9,000/- Extra nourishment - Rs. 5,000/- Pain and suffering - Rs. 16,000/- Future medical exp. - Rs. 5,000/- 8. Counsel for the claimant sought enhancement of compensation for the disability caused and on other heads. 9. The Tribunal took the monthly income of the claimant as Rs.3,000/- and took the percentage of disability as 8% and adopted a multiplier of 18 and awarded Rs. 51,840/- for the disability caused. According to the claimant, he was a fitter in Anugraha Auto Garage, Kannur earning Rs.5,000/- per month. Ext.A8 is his certificate of employment. Taking into consideration the above aspect, we feel that MACA.No.1004/2010 4 his monthly income can be reasonably fixed at Rs. 3,500/-. The multiplier adopted by the Tribunal as 18 and the percentage of disability as 8% appears reasonable having regard to the disabilities caused to the claimant as revealed from Ext.X1 certificate of disability. Thus calculated for the disability caused, the claimant is entitled to a compensation of Rs. 60,480/- ( 8% x 3500 x 12 x 18). Thus on this count, the claimant is entitled to an additional compensation of Rs.8,640/-. 10. There is another aspect in this case. The Tribunal awarded Rs. 9,000/- towards loss of earnings for 3 months @ Rs. 3,000/- per month. As we have fixed the monthly income of the claimant as Rs. 3,500/-, he is entitled to a compensation of Rs.10,500/- towards loss of earnings. Thus on this count, the claimant is entitled to an additional compensation of Rs. 1,500/-. 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. 10,140/-. He is entitled to interest @ 7.5% per MACA.No.1004/2010 5 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.1004/2010 6