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 7TH APRIL 2011 / 17TH CHAITHRA 1933 MACA.No. 2039 of 2006() ----------------------------------- OPMV.873/2001 of MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS TRIBUNAL, IRINJALAKUDA .................... APPELLANT(S): /PETITIONER IN OP(MV) ---------------------------------------------------------- ROSY JOSEPH @ ROSY JACOB, W/O.JOSEPH, PULIMOOTTIL HOUSE, KORATTY P.O., MUKUNDAPURAM TALUK, THRISSUR DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.P.V.BABY SRI.A.N.SANTHOSH RESPONDENT(S): RESPONDENTS IN OP(MV) ---------------------------------------------------------------- 1. P.SEKHAR, S/O.PICHANDY, 9/11, MOUNT ROAD, COONOOR, NILGIRIS. 2. RANGANATHAN, S/O.PERIYASWAMY, HOUSE NO.51, SERING GLASS ST., OOTTY-KOTTAGIRI BHAGAM, NILGIRIS. 3. MANAGER, UNITED INDIA INSURANCE CO.LTD., MOUNT ROAD, COONOOR, NILGIRIS. R3 BY ADV. SRI.N.S.MOHAMMED USMAN THIS MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS APPEAL HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 07/04/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: tss A.K.BASHEER & P.Q. BARKATH ALI, JJ. =~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~==~=~=~= M.A.C.A. No. 2039 of 2006 =~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~==~=~=~= Dated this the 7th day of April, 2011 JUDGMENT Barkath Ali, J. Appellant is the claimant in O.P.(MV) No. 873/2001 on the file of the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Irinjalakuda. In this appeal she challenges the judgment and award of the Tribunal dated March 18, 2006 awarding a compensation of `1,85,422/- for the loss caused to her on account of the injuries sustained by her in a motor accident. 2. The accident happened on April 2, 2001 at about 6.30 a.m. at Koratty Junction. While the claimant was walking along the side of National Highway 47, she was knocked down by a goods vehicle bearing registration No.TDB 3553, driven by the second respondent. She sustained serious injuries. Alleging negligence against the second respondent, the claimant filed the O.P. before the Tribunal under section 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act claiming a compensation of ` 5,00,000/-. MACA 2039/2006 2 3. Respondents 1 and 2, the owner and the driver of the offending vehicle, remained absent and they were set ex parte by the Tribunal. The third respondent, the insurer of the offending vehicle, filed a written statement admitting the policy. The claimant was examined as PW1 and Exts.A1 to A11 were marked on the side of the claimant. Ext.B1 was marked on the side of the contesting third respondent. On an appreciation of the evidence, the Tribunal found that the accident occurred due to negligence of the second respondent and awarded a compensation of ` 1,85,422/- with interest @ 6% p.a. from the date of petition till realization and proportionate cost. The claimant has come up in appeal challenging the quantum of compensation awarded by the Tribunal. 4. Heard the counsel for the claimant and the counsel for the Insurance Company. 5. The accident is not disputed. The finding of the Tribunal that the accident occurred due to the negligence of the second respondent is not seriously challenged in this MACA 2039/2006 3 appeal. Therefore, the only question, which arises for consideration, is whether the claimant is entitled to any enhanced compensation. 6. The claimant sustained the following injuries in the accident:- 1) Compound fracture of tibia and fibula left with segmental loss of bone. 2) Crush injury of left leg below knee with degloving of skin from the level of mid thigh. 3) Later amputated left thigh 6” below left hip. 7. The Tribunal awarded a total compensation of `1,85,422/-. Break up of the compensation awarded is as under:- Value of knee endoskeletal : ` 10,000 prothesis with modular single axix knee joint and SACH foot. Cost of extra nourishment : ` 3,800 and wages to attendants. Transportation expenses : ` 4,730 Medical bills : ` 84,792 Loss of earning : ` 7,500 Pain and suffering : ` 12,000 Loss of amenities and : ` 5,000 happiness. Permanent disability : ` 57,600 ------------------ MACA 2039/2006 4 Total : `1,85,422 ======= 8. The counsel for the claimant sought enhancement of compensation for the disability caused and on other heads. 9. The claimant is a lady aged 54 at the time of the accident. The Tribunal took the monthly income of the claimant as `1,500/-, took the percentage of disability as 40%, adopted multiplier of 8 and awarded a compensation of ` 57,600/- for the disability caused. As the claimant was a tailor at the time of the accident, we feel that her monthly income can reasonably be fixed at Rs.2,500/-. The percentage of disability in the case of above knee amputation of leg is 60%, as provided under Schedule I Part II of the Workmen's Compensation Act. As the claimant was a lady aged 54, proper multiplier that can be adopted in this case is 11. Thus calculated for the disability caused, the claimant is entitled to a compensation of `1,98,000/- (Rs.2,500/- x 12 x 11 x 60%). Thus the claimant is entitled to MACA 2039/2006 5 an additional compensation of `1,40,400/- on this count. 10.The Tribunal awarded `12,000/- for pain and suffering endured and ` 5,000/- for loss of amenities and enjoyment in life. Taking into consideration the fact that her leg was amputated, we feel that a compensation of ` 20,000/- for pain and suffering and `20,000/- for loss of amenities and enjoyment in life would be reasonable. 11. There is another aspect in this case. The Tribunal awarded a sum of ` 7,500/- towards loss of income for five months at the rate of `1,500/- per month. As we have fixed monthly income of the claimant as `2,500/-, she is entitled to a compensation of `12,500/- 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 `1,68,400/-. The Tribunal awarded interest only @ 6% per annum, which appears to be very low. She is entitled to interest @ 7.5% per annum MACA 2039/2006 6 for the compensation already awarded and also for the enhanced compensation from the date of petition till realization. The third respondent being the insurer of the offending vehicle shall 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