IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE A.K.BASHEER & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.Q.BARKATH ALI THURSDAY, THE 25TH NOVEMBER 2010 / 4TH AGRAHAYANA 1932 MACA.No. 653 of 2005() --------------------------------- OPMV.159/1999 of MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS TRIBUNAL, KALPETTA, WAYANAD .................... APPELLANT/PETITIONER ---------------------------------- SHIBU P.MATHEW, S/O. MATHEW, AGED 27 YEARS, PUZHIPPURATH HOUSE, P.O.PAYYAMPALLY, MANANTHAVADY. BY ADV. SRI.ABRAHAM MATHEW (VETTOOR) RESPONDENTS/RESPONDENTS ---------------------------------------------- 1. V.S. AMEERSHA, S/O. SAINUDHEEN, THOLPETTY, P.O.KUTTA, KARNATAKA (DRIVER OF THE JEEP NO.PY O1-D 7147) D.NO. NOT KNOWN) 2. KATTENGADA KARIMBISH, AGED NOT KNOWN FATHER'S NAME NOT KNOWN, A/S.GANESH, 19 ODHAVADI STREET, MUDALIARPET, PONDICHERRY, (OWNER OF THE JEEP NO.PY 01 D-7147). 3. UNITED INDIA INSURANCE COMPANY, KALPETTA, POLICY NO.100306/37/001/11/019/05502/1998 (INSURER OF THE JEEP AND MOTOR CYCLE NO. KL-12/7071) 4. BIJU P.KURIAN, AGED NOT KNOWN S/O. KURIAN, PODIMATTATHI HOUSE, P.O. PAYYAMPALLY, MANANTHAVADY TALUK (DRIVER OF THE MOTOR CYCLE, NO.KL-12/7071) D NO. NOT KNOWN. R3 BY ADV. SRI.N.S.MOHAMMED USMAN. THIS MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS APPEAL HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 25/11/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: rs A.K.BASHEER & P.Q. BARKATH ALI, JJ. =~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~==~=~=~= M.A.C.A. No. 653 of 2005 =~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~==~=~=~= Dated this the 25th day of November, 2010 JUDGMENT Barkath Ali, J. Appellant is the claimant in O.P.(MV) No.159 of 1999 on the file of the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Kalpetta, Wayanad. In this appeal he challenges the judgment and award of the Tribunal dated November 10, 2004 awarding a compensation of Rs.1,04,800/- for the loss caused to him on account of the injuries sustained by him in a motor accident. 2. He sustained the following injuries:- 1) Compound fracture of left humerus. 2) Punctured wounds on left lower part of arm. 3) Compound fracture of right lateral malleolus. 4) Comminuted fracture of right lateral malleolus. 5) Fracture of right radius. 6) Fracture of zygoma left side. 7) Colles fracture right side. MACA 653/2005 2 8) Fracture of nasal bones and fracture of inter condilar bones and other injuries. 3. The accident happened on January 25, 1999 at about 3.30 p.m. at Kattikulam near Mananthavady. While the claimant was pillion riding on a motor cycle bearing registration No. KL-12-7071 ridden by the 4th respondent, he was knocked down by a jeep bearing registration No.PY- 01-D 7147 driven by the 1st respondent. Alleging negligence against the 1st respondent, the claimant filed the Original Petition before the Tribunal under section 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act claiming a compensation of Rs.4 lakhs. 4. Respondents 1 to 3 are the driver, owner and insurer of the offending jeep. The 4th respondent is the rider of the motor cycle. The motor cycle was also insured with the 3rd respondent. The 1st respondent driver of the offending jeep filed a written statement admitting the accident, but attributed negligence to the 4th respondent rider of the motor cycle. Respondents 2 and 4 remained absent before the Tribunal. The 3rd respondent, insurer of MACA 653/2005 3 the offending jeep, filed a written statement admitting the policy. 5. The claimant was examined as PW1 and Exts.A1 to A12 were marked on the side of the claimant. No evidence was adduced by the respondents. On an appreciation of the evidence, the Tribunal found that the accident occurred due to negligence on the part of 1st respondent driver of the offending jeep and awarded a compensation of Rs.1,04,800/- with interest @ 6% p.a. from the date of petition till realization and proportionate cost. The claimant has come up in appeal challenging the quantum of compensation awarded by the Tribunal. 6. Heard the learned counsel for the claimant and learned counsel for the Insurance Company. 7. The accident is not disputed. The finding of the Tribunal that the accident occurred due to the negligence on the part of the 1st respondent is not seriously challenged in this appeal. Therefore, the only question, which arises for consideration, is whether the claimant is entitled to any MACA 653/2005 4 enhanced compensation. 8. The Tribunal awarded a total compensation of Rs.1,04,800/-. Break up of the compensation awarded is as under:- Loss of earning : Rs. 9,000/- Transportation : Rs. 3,000/- Extra nourishment : Rs. 1,500/- Bystander expenses : Rs. 1,500/- Medicines and treatment charges: Rs. 15,000/- Pain and suffering : Rs. 10,000/- Permanent partial disability : Rs. 64,800/- ------------------ Total : Rs.1,04,800/- ======= 9. The learned counsel for the appellant/claimant has mainly sought enhancement of compensation for the disability caused and for pain and suffering endured by the claimant. The learned counsel also pointed out that no compensation was awarded for the loss of amenities and enjoyment in life. 10. The Tribunal took the monthly income of the claimant as Rs.1,500/-, took the percentage of disability as 20%, adopted multiplier of 18 and awarded a compensation MACA 653/2005 5 of Rs.64,800/- towards disability caused. The claimant claimed to be an agriculturist getting Rs.5,000/- per annum. Taking into consideration the above aspect, we feel that his monthly income can reasonably be fixed at Rs.2,500/-. In Ext.A5 certificate of disability the doctor certified that the claimant has a disability of 35%. Taking into account the nature of the disability caused to the claimant, we feel that the percentage of disability can be fixed at 20%. Multiplier adopted by the Tribunal is not seriously challenged. Therefore, for the disability caused, the claimant is entitled to a compensation of Rs.1,62,000/- (Rs.2,500/- x 12 x 18 x 30%). Thus for the disability caused the claimant is entitled to an additional compensation of Rs.97,200/-. 11. The Tribunal awarded Rs.10,000/- for pain and suffering endured by the claimant. Taking into consideration the nature of the injuries sustained by him, we feel that a compensation of Rs.20,000/- would be reasonable on this count. 12. No compensation was awarded for the loss of MACA 653/2005 6 amenities and enjoyment in life. Having regard to the nature of the injuries sustained, we feel that a compensation of Rs.10,000/- would be reasonable on this count. 13. There is another aspect in this case. The Tribunal awarded only Rs.15,000/- for treatment expenses, though the claimant produced bills Ext.A9 series for Rs.37,000/-. As genuineness of the bills produced by the claimant is not disputed, we feel that towards treatment expenses, the claimant is entitled to a compensation of Rs.37,000/- covered by Ext.A9 series bills. 14. The Tribunal awarded interest at 6% per annum, which appears to be very low. The claimant is entitled to interest @ 7.5% per annum from the date of petition till realization for the compensation already awarded and also for the enhanced compensation. 15. In the result, the claimant is found entitled to an additional compensation of Rs.1,39,200/-. He is entitled to interest @7.5 % from the date of petition till realization for MACA 653/2005 7 the compensation already awarded and also for the enhanced compensation. The 3rd respondent Insurance Company shall deposit the amount within two months from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment with notice to the claimant. The appeal is disposed of as found above. A.K.BASHEER, JUDGE. P.Q. BARKATH ALI, JUDGE. mn