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 3RD JUNE 2010 / 13TH JYAISTHA 1932 MACA.No. 2339 of 2007() ----------------------- OPMV.1375/2003 of MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS TRIBUNAL, PERUMBAVOOR .................... APPELLANT/PETITIONER: ----------------------------------- K.V. RAJAN, S/O. VELU, KATTIPLACKAL (H), PINARMUNDA, KUNNATHUNADU VILLAGE KUNNATHUNADU TALUK. BY ADV. SRI.K.SUNILKUMAR RESPONDENT(S): RESPONDENTS: --------------------------- 1. SUNILKUMAR, S/O. DASAN, VELIPARAMBIL VEEDU, NADAMA VILLAGE, EAST TO TRIPUNITHURA RAILWAY STATION. 2. SHEELA CHANDRAN, W/O. MADHUSOODANAN NAIR, PROPRIETOR, SRI SAI ENTERPRISES, MOOZHIKULANGARA P.O., KOTTAYAM. 3. UNITED INDIA INSURANCE CO. LTD., MUNICIPAL SHOPPING COMPLEX, KACHERITHAZHAM, MUVATTUPUZHA-686 661. ADV. SMT.P.A.REZIYA FOR R3 THIS MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS APPEAL HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 03/06/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: A.K. BASHEER & P.Q. BARKATH ALI, JJ. ------------------------------------------------------ M.A.C.A. 2339 of 2007 ------------------------------------------------------ Dated: JUNE 3, 2010 JUDGMENT Barkath Ali, J. In this appeal under sec.173 of the Motor Vehicles Act, the claimant in OP(MV) 1375/2003 on the file of the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Perumbavoor, challenges the judgment and award of the Tribunal dated February 15, 2007 awarding a compensation of Rs.34,580/- for the loss caused to the claimant on account of the injuries sustained in a motor accident. 2. The facts leading to this appeal in brief are these: The claimant was aged 51 at the time of the accident and was employed in FACT, Cochin Division, earning a salary of Rs.9573/-. On June 26, 2000 at about 8.30 a.m. the claimant was riding his motorcycle bearing registration No.KL-7/9432 along the Ambalamughal - Karimughal road. When he reached near Karimughal police station, another motorcycle bearing registration No. KL-5/E-8949 ridden by the 1st respondent came at a high speed from the opposite side and dashed against the motorcycle of the claimant. The claimant sustained very serious injuries. According to the claimant the accident occurred due to the rash and negligent riding of the other M.A.C.A. 2339 of 2007 2 motorcycle by the 1st respondent. The 1st respondent as the rider, the 2nd respondent as the owner and the 3rd respondent as the insurer of the offending motorcycle bearing registration No. KL-5/E- 8949 are jointly and severally liable to pay compensation to the claimant. 3. Respondents Nos.1 and 2, the rider and the owner of the offending motorcycle, remained absent and were set ex parte by the Tribunal. The 3rd respondent, insurer of the offending motorcycle, filed a written statement admitting the policy and further contending that there was negligence on the part of the claimant also. 4. PW.1 was examined and Exts.A1 to A12 were marked on the side of the claimant before the Tribunal. No evidence was adduced by the contesting 3rd respondent. On an appreciation of evidence the Tribunal awarded a compensation of Rs.34,580/- with interest at 7% 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 1st M.A.C.A. 2339 of 2007 3 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.A6, copy of the wound certificate, issued from Samaritan Hospital, Pazhanganad: 1. lacerated wound 5 x 1.5 x 1.5 cm. left knee. 2. patellar tendon cut left. 3. fracture of nasal bone. 4. brain concussion. He was in the hospital for 13 days. 8. The Tribunal awarded a total compensation of Rs.34,580/-. The break up of the compensation awarded is as under:- loss of income - Rs.14,330/- attendant's charges - 1,500/- transportation expenses - 500/- damage to clothings - 250/- extra nourishment - 1,000/- pain and suffering - 10,000/- loss of amenities - 7,000/- 9. The Counsel for the appellant/claimant sought enhancement of the compensation for the loss of amenities, pain and suffering, M.A.C.A. 2339 of 2007 4 extra nourishment etc.. Taking into consideration the nature of the injuries sustained and the period of treatment the claimant has undergone and as he has failed to prove that due to the injuries sustained, he was compelled to take voluntary retirement from the job, we feel that the compensation awarded by the Tribunal is just and reasonable. It follows that he is not entitled to any enhanced compensation. That being so, the appeal has to be dismissed. In the result, the appeal is dismissed. No costs. A.K. BASHEER, JUDGE P.Q. BARKATH ALI, JUDGE mt/-