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 16TH JUNE 2010 / 26TH JYAISTHA 1932 MACA.No. 2540 of 2008() ----------------------- OPMV.2201/2002 of MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS TRIBUNAL, THRISSUR .................... APPELLANT(S): PETITIONER: -------------------------------------------- MAJESH, S/O.GOPALAN, ERANELLUR HOUSE, ERANELLUR VILLAGE DESOM, TALAPPILLY TALUK. BY ADVS. SRI.NAGARAJ NARAYANAN, SRI.SAIJO HASSAN, SRI.A.S.SABU. RESPONDENT(S): RESPONDENTS: ---------------------------------------------------- 1. N.C.VINCENT, S/O.CHACKKO, BROTHERS RESIDENCY, ANJUMOORTHIMANGALAM, WADAKKANCHERY, ALATHUR. 2. K.K.BABU, S/O.K.S.KUMARAN, KULANGARAPARAMBIL HOUSE, PUTHUKKARA LANE, CHEMBUKKAVU,THRISSUR. 3. M/S.ORIENTAL INSURANCE COMPANY LIMITED, TSM COMPLEX, RAILWAY STATION ROAD, PALAKKAD. R1 & R2 BY ADV. SRI.P.SANTHOSH (PODUVAL) THIS MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS APPEAL HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 16/06/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: Kss A.K.BAHSEER & P.Q.BARKATH ALI, JJ. =~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~= M.A.C.A. No. 2540 of 2008 =~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~= Dated this the 16th day of June, 2010 JUDGMENT Barkath Ali, J. In this appeal under Section 173 of Motor Vehicles Act, the claimant in O.P. (MV) No.2201 of 2002 of Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Thrissur challenges the judgment and award of the Tribunal dated May 14, 2008 awarding a compensation of Rs.2,63,100/- for the loss caused to him on account of the injuries sustained by him in a motor accident. 2. The facts leading to this appeal, in brief, are these:- On June 10, 2002 at about 4.30 p.m. the claimant was riding a motor cycle bearing registration No.KL.10/H.5714 along the road at Kuruvatta. At that time a tempo van bearing registration No.KL/9.K 5365, driven by the second respondent, came at a high speed and dashed against the motor cycle of the claimant. The claimant sustained serious injuries. According to the claimant, the accident occurred due to the rash and negligent driving of MACA 2540/2008 2 the offending tempo van by the second respondent. First respondent as the owner, second respondent as the driver and third respondent as the insurer of the offending tempo van are jointly and severally liable to pay compensation to the claimant. 3. Respondents, 1 and 2, the owner and driver of the offending tempo van, remained absent and were set ex parte by the Tribunal. The third respondent, the insurer of the offending tempo van, filed a written statement, admitting the policy. 4. PW1 was examined and Exts.A1 to A19 were marked on the side of the claimant before the Tribunal. Exts.B1 and B2 were marked on the side of the contesting third respondent. The Tribunal, on an appreciation of evidence, found that the accident occurred due to the negligence of the second respondent and awarded a compensation of Rs.2,63,100/- with interest at the rate of 7% per annum from the date of petition till realization. The claimant has now come up in appeal challenging the MACA 2540/2008 3 quantum of compensation awarded by the Tribunal. 5. Heard the counsel for the claimant and the counsel for 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 claimant sustained the following injuries as revealed from Ext.A11 copy of the wound certificate:- 1) Compound depressed fracture right frontal bone. 2) Bifrontal contusion. 3) Contusion temporal region. 4) Dislocation left hip. 5) Compound fracture both bones right forearm. 6) Fracture shaft femur right. 7) Fracture radius left, fracture ulna, patellar. tendon avalgias. MACA 2540/2008 4 8) Dislocation left knee. 9) Lacerated wound forehead, right knee, left knee. 10) Punctured wound right forearm. 11) Abrasions right wrist left leg, left knee left and frontal. 8. As directed by this Court, Medical Board attached to the Medical College Hospital, Thrissur assessed the disability of the claimant as 46.5%. The certificate of the Medical Board is marked as Ext.X1. The claimant has now the following disabilities:- 1) Difficulty in squatting and climbing stairs. 2) Difficulty in lifting heavy weights. 3) Pain and stiffness (lt) knee and hip. 4) Radiologically united fracture femur (Rt), forearm (Rt) and radius (lt), implants have been removed. 9. The Tribunal awarded a total compensation of Rs.2,63,100/-. Break up of the compensation awarded is as under :- MACA 2540/2008 5 Loss of earning : Rs. 10,000/- Transportation expenses : Rs. 2,000/- Extra-nourishment : Rs. 2,000/- Damage to clothing : Rs. 500/- Treatment expense : Rs.1,46,300/- Bystander's expense : Rs. 2,500/- Pain and sufferings : Rs. 25,000/- Loss of amenities : Rs. 10,000/- Disability : Rs. 64,800/- -------------------- Total : Rs.2,63,100/- ======== 10. The learned counsel for appellant sought enhancement of compensation towards the disability caused and for loss of amenities and enjoyment in life. 11. The Tribunal took the monthly income of the claimant as Rs.2,000/-, adopted multiplier of 18 , took the percentage of disability as 15% and awarded Rs.64,800/- for the disability caused. The Medical Board assessed the disability of the claimant as 46.5%, as seen from Ext.X1. Taking into consideration the disability caused to the claimant as reported in Ext.X1, we feel that his disability can be assessed at 30%. The claimant as PW1 testified that he was a Goldsmith by profession and used to earn MACA 2540/2008 6 Rs.4,000/- per month. Taking into consideration the fact that the claimant was a Goldsmith, we feel that his monthly income can reasonably be estimated at Rs.2,500/-. The multiplier of 18 adopted by the Tribunal is not seriously disputed. Thus, calculated 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, on this count, the claimant is entitled to an additional compensation of Rs.97,200/-. 12. For loss of amenities and enjoyment in life, Rs.10,000/- was awarded by the Tribunal, which appears to be very low. Taking into consideration the nature of the injuries sustained by the claimant, we feel that a compensation of Rs.20,000/- would be reasonable on this count. Thus, the claimant is entitled to an additional compensation of Rs10,000/- for loss of amenities and enjoyment in life. As regards the compensation granted under other heads, we find the same to be reasonable and therefore, we are not disturbing the same. MACA 2540/2008 7 13. In the result, the claimant is found entitled to an additional compensation of Rs.1,07,200/-. He is entitled to interest @ 7% per annum from the date of petition till realization and proportionate cost. The third respondent being the insurer of the offending tempo van, shall deposit the amount before the Tribunal within two months from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment with notice to the claimant. 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. mn.