IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE R.BASANT & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE C.T.RAVIKUMAR FRIDAY, THE 13TH MARCH 2009 / 22ND PHALGUNA 1930 MACA.No. 566 of 2007() ---------------------- OPMV.772/2002 of MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS TRIBUNAL, KOTTAYAM .................... APPELLANT/PETITIONER: ---------------------------- SANTHA, W/O PADMANABHAN, THACHAPARAMBIL, PERIMBALAM P.O., CHERTHALA TALUK, ALAPPUZHA DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.PHILIP T.VARGHESE SRI.THOMAS T.VARGHESE SMT.ACHU SUBHA ABRAHAM RESPONDENTS/RESPONDENTS: ---------------------------------- 1. SADASIVAN, S/O NARAYANAN, KADAMANKUNNEL HOUSE, NEAR KUTTICKAL CO-OPERATIVE -BANK, PAMPADY P.O., KOTTAYAM. 2. JOSEPH CHACKO, S/O K.E.CHACKO, THOTTICHIRAYIL, KUMARAKOM P.O., KOTTAYAM. 3. THE NEW INDIA ASSURANCE CO.LTD., KOTTAYAM. R3 BY ADV. SRI.P.M.M.NAJEEB KHAN THIS MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS APPEAL HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 13/03/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: R. BASANT & C.T. RAVIKUMAR, JJ. ----------------------------------------------- M.A.C.A No. 566 OF 2007 ----------------------------------------------- Dated this the 13th day of March, 2009 JUDGMENT BASANT, J The claimant before the Tribunal is the appellant before us. She claimed an amount of Rs.3 lakhs as compensation for personal injuries suffered in a motor accident which took place on 24.09.01. She had suffered fracture of the mandible and maxilla and fracture to the nasal bone. She had lost her second molar as a result of the accident. She was an in-patient for a total period of 22 days in three different spells, twice at the Medical College and once at the local Primary Health Centre. She had not suffered any disability except the loss of second molar. She asserted that she had suffered disfigurement also. She was employed as a coir worker attached to a Coir Mating Society. 2. Before the Tribunal, PWs 1 ad 2 were examined and Exts.A1 to A20 were marked. The Tribunal on an anxious consideration of all the available inputs come to the conclusion that the appellant is entitled only for an amount of Rs.17,662/- as per details shown below: MACA:566/07 -:2:- 1. Pain and suffering :Rs. 4,500/- 2. Medical expenses :Rs. 1,562/- (against bills produced) 3. Extra nourishment and bystander's expenses :Rs. 1,500/- 4. Damage to clothing :Rs. 1,000/- 5. Loss of earning(2 x1,300) :Rs. 2,600/- 6. Compensation for injury, disablement and discomfort :Rs. 6,500/- (3,500 + 3,000) ----------------- Total :Rs.17,662/- ========== 3. The appellant claims to be aggrieved by the impugned award. Called upon to explain the nature of challenge which the appellant wants to raise against the impugned award, the learned counsel for the appellant first of all contends that the amount awarded under the head pain and suffering is painfully low. Two fractures have been suffered. The appellant had continued treatment as an in-patient in three spells. The last of such admission was in February 2002. Loss of the second molar had also taken place. Taking all circumstances into account, we are satisfied that, an amount of Rs.8,000/- can in all be awarded under the head pain and suffering(i.e., Rs.3,500/- more). 4. Counsel then contends that no amount has been awarded as expenses for transportation to hospital. The appellant was admitted to the hospital thrice and in these circumstances, we MACA:566/07 -:3:- are satisfied that the amount of Rs.1,500/- can safely be fixed as quantum of compensation payable for transportation to hospital. 5. We find that a total amount of Rs.6,500/- has been awarded, described as compensation payable for injury suffered, disablement and discomfort. We are satisfied that the said amount awarded under the composite head of loss of amenities including disfiguration is sufficient and does not warrant appellate interference at all. 6. Counsel contends that the monthly income reckoned at Rs.1,300/- is grossly inadequate. He further submits that the complete loss of earnings initially and partial loss of earnings later have not been reasonably computed. Only an amount of Rs.2,600/- had been awarded under that head. In the circumstances of this case and considering the three spells of hospitalisation and the nature of injuries, we are satisfied that, three months loss of earning can be granted instead of two months granted by the Tribunal. The adoption of Rs.1,300/- as monthly income does not, according to us, warrant interference. 7. The above discussions lead us to the conclusion that the appellant is entitled for the following further amounts as MACA:566/07 -:4:- compensation in addition to the amounts already awarded by the Tribunal. 1. Transport to hospital :Rs.1,500/- (no amount awarded) 2. Loss of earnings :Rs.1,300/- (3x1,300 minus 2,600) 3. Pain and suffering :Rs.3,500/- (8,000 minus 4,500) ---------------- Total :Rs.6,300/- more ========= 8. The Tribunal has awarded interest at the rate of 6% per annum. Learned counsel for the appellant contends, relying on precedents, that interest must have been awarded at least at the rate of 7.5% per annum. We agree with the learned counsel. The entire amount of compensation shall bear interest at the rate of 7.5% per annum from the date of the petition to the date of payment. 9. This appeal is accordingly allowed in part to the above extent. R. BASANT, JUDGE C.T. RAVIKUMAR, JUDGE ttb MACA:566/07 -:5:- MACA:566/07 -:6:-