IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE J.B.KOSHY & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE THOMAS P.JOSEPH MONDAY, THE 10TH NOVEMBER 2008 / 19TH KARTHIKA 1930 MACA.No. 1273 of 2005() ----------------------- OPMV.2650/2001 of MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS TRIBUNAL, KOTTAYAM .................... APPELLANT(S): PETITIONER. ----------------------------------- P.K.BIJI, W/O.RAJASEKHARAN, ROHINI BAHVAN, KUDAVECHOOR KARA, VECHOOR VILLAGE. BY ADV. SRI.M.P.MADHAVANKUTTY RESPONDENT(S): RESPONDENTS. --------------------------- 1. RAJASEKHARAN, ROHINI BHAVAN, KUDAVECHOOR KARA, KUDAVECHOOR VILLAGE. 2. THE UNITED INDIA INSURANCE CO.LTD., COCHIN. ADV. SRI.RAJESH THOMAS FOR R2 THIS MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS APPEAL HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 10/11/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: J.B.KOSHY & THOMAS P. JOSEPH, JJ. -------------------------------------- M.A.C.A.No.1273 of 2005 -------------------------------------- Dated this the 10th day of November, 2008. JUDGMENT Thomas P.Joseph, J. Appellant, aged about 29 years at the relevant time and said to be a tailor by occupation sustained injuries in a motor vehicle accident on 27.7.2001 while riding on the pillion of a motor cycle which the first respondent, her husband was riding. Accident occurred due to the motor cycle skiding. Learned Tribunal found that the accident occurred due to the rashness and negligence of the first respondent. That finding has become final. Though the appellant claimed Rs.2,22,000/- by way of compensation, learned Tribunal awarded Rs.59,200/-. The Second respondent was directed to deposit the amount with interest at the rate of 6% per annum from the date of application till deposit and cost of Rs.2,500/-. Dissatisfied with the amount of compensation awarded, appellant has come up in appeal. 2. Heard counsel for the appellant and the contesting respondent. MACA No.1273/2005 2 3. It is contended by learned counsel for appellant that compensation awarded is very low on all heads. It is also contended that the monthly income of the appellant fixed by the learned Tribunal is low. According to the learned counsel for contesting respondent, amount awarded is just and no interference is required. 4. Appellant gave evidence as PW1 and claimed that from the tailoring work and rearing cows she was earning Rs.3,000/- per month. Learned Tribunal was not inclined to accept that claim and fixed the monthly income as Rs.900/-. Even if it is assumed that being a house wife the appellant was not having any job or occupation, her services to the family can be valued in terms of money for the purpose of determining the amount of compensation payable. There is also no reason to disbelieve her evidence that she was an earning member. Considering the age of the appellant and all other relevant aspects we are inclined to think that the monthly income fixed by the learned Tribunal is very low. The monthly income of the appellant is fixed as Rs.2,500/- 5. Exts.A5 to A9 show that the appellant sustained the following injuries:- “(1) Clean lacerated wound 3x2 cm. over the chin. MACA No.1273/2005 3 (2) Clean lacerated wound 4x2 cm, over the lower lip. (3) Multiple abrasions over the upper limbs. (4) Active bleeding from right ear. (5) Loss of upper incisors (teeth) and fracture mandible. (6) Suspected head injury.” She was advised consultation with Faciomaxillary and Dental Surgeons. She remained inpatient, as per Ext.A6, for four days. Ext.A8 shows that the mandible fracture was reduced and immobilised with arch bar fixation. Partial denturing was also done. Ext.A9 shows that the appellant underwent ayurvedic treatment for seven days. In these circumstances, the appellant was not able to earn for a period of three months which brings the compensation payable for loss of earnings to Rs.7,500/-. Learned Tribunal has awarded only Rs.2,700/- on that count. Thus, the additional compensation payable on that count comes to Rs.4,800/-. MACA No.1273/2005 4 6. So far as compensation payable for loss of amenities and for affecting cosmetic appearance of the appellant is concerned, the amount awarded is only Rs.5,000/-. We have stated above the injuries suffered and the nature of the treatment undergone by the appellant. Appellant is a lady aged about 29 years at the time of accident. That, learned Tribunal awarded compensation for affecting cosmetic appearance indicated that there was some disfigurement. Considering the nature of injuries and disfigurement, we are inclined to award Rs.10,000/- as compensation for loss of amenities and for affecting the cosmetic appearance of the appellant as against Rs.5,000/- awarded by the Tribunal. Appellant is entitled to get an additional compensation of Rs.5,000/- on that count. 7. Though it is contended by the learned counsel that compensation awarded on other counts is also meager, on going through the award and hearing the learned counsel and considering the total amount to which the appellant is found entitled, we are satisfied that compensation awarded on other counts is just. Thus, the additional compensation payable to the appellant comes to Rs.9,800/- . Appellant is entitled to get interest on the said amount at the rate of 7.5% per annum from the date of application till realisation. MACA No.1273/2005 5 This appeal therefore, is allowed in part allowing the appellant to realise Rs.9,800/-(Rupees Nine thousand and eight hundred only) as additional compensation with interest at the rate of 7.5% per annum from the date of application till realisation from the respondents. Second respondent being the insurer of the offending vehicle is directed to deposit the said amount in the Tribunal within one month from this day. On such deposit, appellant is permitted to withdraw the said amount. J.B.KOSHY, JUDGE. THOMAS P.JOSEPH, JUDGE. cks