IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE M.N.KRISHNAN THURSDAY, THE 18TH SEPTEMBER 2008 / 27TH BHADRA 1930 MACA.No. 272 of 2004() ---------------------- OPMV.1148/1999 of MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS TRIBUNAL, MANJERI .................... CLAIMANT/APPELLANT: --------------------------- M.T. YOOSUF, S/O. MOHAMED, CHAKKIYATHCHALIL HOUSE, P.O. KAVANOOR AMSOM, KAVANOOR. BY ADV. SRI.V.V.ASOKAN SRI.PAUL ABRAHAM VAKKANAL RESPONDENTS: RESPONDENTS: ------------------------- 1. MOORPANTHODI ABDURAHIMAN, S/O. MOHAMED, KAVANOOR P.O., AREACODE, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT. 2. V. MANUKUTTAN, S/O. SANKARAN, ERAYAPURATH HOUSE, KAVANOOR P.O., AREACODE, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT. 3. NEW INDIA ASSURANCE COMPANY LTD., MANJERI. BY ADV. SRI.K.M.SATHYANATHA MENON SRI.VPK.PANICKER FOR R3 THIS MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS APPEAL HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 18/09/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: M.N.KRISHNAN, J. -------------------------- M.A.C.A. No. 272 OF 2004 --------------------- Dated this the 18th day of September, 2008 JUDGMENT This appeal is preferred against the award passed by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Manjeri, in OP(MV) 1148/99. The claimant, aged 31 years, sustained injuries in a motor vehicle accident. He had suffered fracture of the left tibia and fibula. He had undergone inpatient treatment for 9 days in the Medical College Hospital, Kozhikode and thereafter was treated again for a period of 5 days. The Tribunal awarded him a total compensation of Rs.26,300/-. The Tribunal had also exonerated the Insurance Company from the liability on the ground that he was a gratuitous passenger in a goods vehicle. Assailing the finding regarding quantum of compensation and exoneration of the Insurance Company from the liability, the claimant has come up in appeal. 2. Heard the counsel appearing for the appellant, owner and Insurance Company. So far as quantum of compensation is concerned, the Tribunal has granted reasonable compensation for loss of earnings, pain and suffering, medical expenses, transport expenses and extra nourishment. It has to be remembered that the accident is of the year 1995. There is no document to show that there was any disability for the person. But it is certain that when a person sustains fracture of the tibia and fibula and as he had undergone inpatient treatment in the hospital on MACA No. 272/04 2 two occasions, there would have been loss of amenities and enjoyment in life for him. So taking into consideration that aspect, I award a sum of Rs.5,000/- under that head. 3. The next contention is regarding the exoneration of the Insurance Company from the liability. The claimant attempted to project a case that he was a pedestrian hit by an autorickshaw. The Tribunal found that petitioner himself admitted that he was travelling in the goods autorickshaw involved in the accident. He has no case that he was the owner of the goods or representative of the owner of the goods accompanying the same. Therefore as per the decision reported in New India Assurance Co. Ltd. v. Asha Rani [2003 (1) KLT 165 (SC)] the Insurance Company cannot be mulcted with the liability. So the said finding of the Tribunal does not call for any interference. In the result, the MACA is partly allowed and the claimant is entitled to an additional compensation of Rs.5,000/- with 7 % interest on the said sum from the date of petition till realisation. Respondents 1 and 2 are jointly and severally liable to pay the amount within a period of 60 days from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment. M.N.KRISHNAN, JUDGE vps MACA No. 272/04 3