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 7TH JUNE 2010 / 17TH JYAISTHA 1932 MACA.No. 305 of 2004() ---------------------- OPMV.1220/1997 of MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS TRIBUNAL, KOTTAYAM .................... APPELLANT/PETITIONER IN THE OP(MV): --------------------------------------------------------------- CYRIL, S/O. PHILIP (MINOR) REPRESENTED BY NEXT FRIEND, FATHER, P.K.PHILIP, RESIDING AT PUNCHATHALACKAL, MANNAR, POOZHIKKOL P.O., KOTTAYAM. BY ADV. SRI.JOSE JOSEPH (MANNAR) RESPONDENT(S): RESPONDENT IN THE OP(MV): -------------------------------------------------------------------------- 1. SANKARAPANDIAN C/O.HOTEL ABAD PLAZA, M.G.ROAD, ERNAKULAM. 2. NATIONAL INSURANCE CO.LTD., REPRESENTED BY DIVISIONAL MANAGER, KOTTAYAM. R2 BY ADV. SRI.M.A.GEORGE THIS MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS APPEAL HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 07/06/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: Kss A.K.BAHSEER & P.Q.BARKATH ALI, JJ. =~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~= M.A.C.A. No. 305 of 2004 =~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~= Dated this the 7th 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.1220 of 1997 of Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Kottayam challenges the judgment and award of the Tribunal dated August 30, 2003 awarding a compensation of Rs.32,800/- 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:- The claimant was a boy, aged 12 at the time of the accident. On March 14, 1997 at about 4.30 p.m. while the claimant was walking along the side of the road at Kadathuruthy, he was knocked down by a motor cycle bearing registration No.KL-7B 2483, ridden by the first respondent. The claimant sustained serious injuries. According to the claimant, the accident occurred due to the rash and negligent driving of the offending motor cycle by MACA 305/2004 2 the first respondent. First respondent as the owner-cum-rider and second respondent as the insurer of the offending motor cycle are jointly and severally liable to pay compensation to the claimant. 3. The first respondent, owner-cum-rider of the offending motor cycle, remained absent and was set ex parte by the Tribunal. The second respondent, the insurer of the offending motor cycle, filed a written statement, admitting the policy. 4. Exts.A1 to A15 were marked on the side of the claimant before the Tribunal. No evidence was adduced by the contesting third respondent. The Tribunal, on an appreciation of evidence, awarded a compensation of Rs.32,800/-. The claimant has now come up in appeal challenging the quantum of compensation awarded by the Tribunal. 5. Heard the learned counsel for the claimant and the learned counsel for Insurance Company. 6. The accident is not disputed. The finding of the Tribunal that the accident occurred due to the negligence on MACA 305/2004 3 the part of the first 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 cerebral oedema and loss of some teeth, as seen from Ext.A4 wound certificate and Ext.A5 discharge card issued from the hospital. Ext.P7 is the certificate issued from the dental surgeon. 8. The Tribunal awarded a total compensation of Rs.32,800/-. Break up of the amount awarded is as under :- Treatment expenses : Rs. 1,800/- Bystander's expense : Rs. 1,000/- Pain and sufferings : Rs. 10,000/- Loss of teeth : Rs. 15,000/- Disfiguration caused : Rs. 5,000/- -------------------- Total : Rs. 32,800/- ======== 9. The learned counsel for appellant sought enhancement of compensation for medial expenses and pain and suffering. 10. The Tribunal awarded a compensation of Rs.10,000/- for pain and suffering endured by the claimant, which appears MACA 305/2004 4 to be very low. Taking into account the nature of injuries sustained and the period of treatment the claimant undergone, we feel that a compensation of Rs.15,000/- would be reasonable on this count. Thus, the claimant is entitled to an additional compensation of Rs.5,000/- for pain and suffering. 11. Learned counsel for the claimant argued that no compensation was awarded for the disability caused and for consequential loss of earning power. The claimant was aged 12 at the time of the accident. No certificate of disability was produced by him. Therefore, we are of the view that the Tribunal is justified in not awarding compensation for the alleged disability caused. 12. The Tribunal awarded Rs.15,000/- for loss of teeth. No compensation was awarded for the loss of amenities and enjoyment in life. As the claimant has lost three teeth, we feel that a compensation of Rs.5,000/- would be reasonable for the loss of amenities and enjoyment in life. Ext.A7 the certificate issued by the Dentist and the bill produced by the claimant show that the claimant had spent Rs.18,450/- for fixing three MACA 305/2004 5 new teeth. Therefore, towards medical expenses he is entitled to an additional compensation of Rs.18,450/-. As regards the compensation awarded under other heads, we find the same to be reasonable and therefore, we are not disturbing the same. 13. In the result, the claimant is found entitled to an additional compensation of Rs.28,450/-. He is entitled to interest @ 9% per annum from the date of petition till realization and proportionate cost. The second respondent, being the insurer of the offending motor cycle, 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.