IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE A.K.BASHEER & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.Q.BARKATH ALI MONDAY, THE 3RD JANUARY 2011 / 13TH POUSHA 1932 MACA.No. 29 of 2007() --------------------------- OPMV.1686/2000 of MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS TRIBUNAL, ALAPPUZHA .................... APPELLANT(S): APPELLANT/PETITIONER ------------------------------------------------ *1. KUTTAPPAN, S/O.IDUKKULA, AGED 54 YEARS, MANNOOR MONI VELIYIL, WARD NO.1., KARTHIKAPPALLY PANCHAYATH, VETTUVENI, HARIPPAD.(DIED. LR'S IMPLEADED) 2. KUNJUMOL,W/O.LATE KUTTAPPAN, (PETITIONER IN MACA) AGED 58 YEARS, MANNOOR MONI VELIYIL, WARD NO.1, KARTHIKAPPALLY PANCHAYATH, VETTUVENI,HARIPPAD. 3. SALI O., D/O.LATE KUTTAPPAN (PETITIONER IN MACA) AGED 39 YEARS, KRIPA BHAVAN, THULUMPARAMBIL HOUSE, HARIPPAD P.O. 4. RAJU K,S/O. LATE KUTTAPPAN @ YOHANNAN, (PETITIONER IN MACA), AGED 35 YEARS, MANNOOR MONI VELIYIL, VETTUVELI, HARIPPAD . 5. REJI YOHANNAN, S/O.KUTTAPPAN, (PETITIONER IN MACA) MANNOOR MONI VELIYIL, VETTUVELI, HARIPPAD . 6. BEETHA K., D/O. LATE KUTTAPPAN, (PETITIONER IN MACA) AGED 32 YEARS, THAKADAYIL, ANARI P.O., CHERUKARA, ALAPPUZHA DISTRICT. * ADDITIONAL APPELLANTS 2 TO 6 ARE IMPLEADED AS LR'S OF DECEASED APPELLANT VIDE ORDER DATED 04/08/2009 IN I.A.NO.2111/2009. BY ADV. SRI.SAJITH KUMAR V. svs ...............2/-... ...2... MACA.No.29/2007 RESPONDENT(S): RESPONDENTS IN THE OP(MV) --------------------------------------------------------- 1. THE DIRECTOR, KREEM DRINKS (P)LTD., KADAVANTHRA, KOCHI 20. 2. SANKARAN NAIR, S/O.RAMAN PILLAI, LEKSHMI NIVAS, PONNURUNTHIKKARA, POONITHURA VILLAGE, ERNAKULAM. 3. THE ORIENTAL INSURANCE COMPANY LTD., BRANCH OFFICE II, ENSIGN BUILDING, M.G.ROAD, KOCHI 11. R1 BY ADV. SRI.ABRAHAM JOHN R3 BY DR.ELIZABETH VARKEY THIS MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS APPEAL HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 03/01/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: svs A.K.BASHEER & P.Q. BARKATH ALI, JJ. =~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~==~=~=~= M.A.C.A. No. 29 of 2007 =~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~==~=~=~= Dated this the 3rd day of January, 2011 JUDGMENT Barkath Ali, J. Appellant is the claimant in O.P.(MV) No. 1686 of 2000 on the file of the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Alappuzha. In this appeal he challenges the judgment and award of the Tribunal dated December 2nd, 2005 awarding a compensation of Rs.52,000/- for the loss caused to him on account of the injuries sustained by him in a motor accident. 2. The claimant sustained laceration on the occipital area, discharge from left ear and contusion on the left maxilla. The accident happened on May 27, 1999 near Angamali railway station. While he was cycling along the road in front of the Railway Station, Angamaly he was knocked down by a tempo van bearing registration No.KL- 7/L 8082 driven by the 2nd respondent. Alleging negligence against the 2nd respondent, the claimant filed the O.P. before the Tribunal under section 166 of the Motor Vehicles MACA 29/2007 2 Act claiming a compensation of Rs.2,12,500/-. 3. Respondents 1 and 2, owner and driver of the offending tempo van, filed a written statement admitting the accident, but contended that the accident occurred due to the negligence of the claimant. The 3rd respondent Insurance Company filed a written statement admitting the policy but attributed negligence on the side of the claimant. 4. Exts.A1 to A10 and Ext.C1 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 2nd respondent and awarded a compensation of Rs.52,000/- with interest @ 6% p.a. from the date of petition till realization. The claimant has come up in appeal challenging the quantum of compensation awarded by the Tribunal. 5. Heard the learned counsel for the claimant and learned counsel for the Insurance Company. 6. The accident is not disputed. The finding of the MACA 29/2007 3 Tribunal that the accident occurred due to the negligence of the 2nd respondent is not seriously 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.52,000/-. Break up of the compensation awarded is as under:- Permanent disability : Rs. 25,000 Loss of earning : Rs. 4,500 Treatment expenses : Rs. 4,000 Transportation : Rs. 1,000 Bystander expenses : Rs. 2,000 and extra nourishment. Damage to clothing : Rs. 500 Pain and suffering : Rs. 10,000 Loss of amenities : Rs. 5,000 ------------------ Total : Rs.52,000 ======= 8. The claimant sustained the following injuries in the accident:- 1) Laceration on the occipital area and discharge from left ear. 2) Contusion on left maxilla. MACA 29/2007 4 3) Multiple pneumowebs in supra and infratentorial compartments. 4) Fracture on occipital bone and petrous. 9. The learned counsel for the appellant/claimant sought enhancement of compensation for the disability caused and on other heads. 10. The Tribunal took the monthly income of the claimant as Rs.1,500/-, took the percentage of disability as 10%, adopted multiplier of 14 and awarded a compensation of Rs.25,000/- towards disability caused to the claimant. The claimant is engaged in the business of rearing duck. Taking into consideration the above aspect, we feel that his monthly income can reasonably be fixed at Rs.2,500/-. The Medical Board assessed his disability at 20%, as seen from Ext.C1 report of the Medical Board. The claimant has now profound sensory neural hearing loss in his left ear. Therefore, we feel that his percentage of disability can reasonably be fixed at 15%. Mutliplier adopted by the Tribunal 14 is not seriously challenged. Thus calculated for MACA 29/2007 5 the disability caused, the claimant is entitled to a compensation of Rs.63,000/- (Rs.2,500/- x 12 x 14 x 15%). Thus, the claimant is entitled to an additional compensation of Rs.38,000/- on this count. 11. The Tribunal awarded Rs.5,000/- for the loss of amenities and enjoyment in life, 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.10,000/- would be reasonable on this count. As regards the compensation awarded under other heads, we find the same to be reasonable and therefore, we are not disturbing the same. 12. In the result, the claimant is found entitled to an additional compensation of Rs.43,000/-. The Tribunal awarded interest only @ 6% per annum, which appears to be very low. He is entitled to interest @ 7.5% per annum from the date of petition till realization for the compensation already awarded by the Tribunal and also for the enhanced compensation. The 3rd respondent shall MACA 29/2007 6 deposit the amount 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