IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE J.B.KOSHY & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.N.RAVINDRAN TUESDAY, THE 10TH JUNE 2008 / 20TH JYAISHTA 1930 MACA.No. 297 of 2003() --------------------------------- OPMV.872/1997 of MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS TRIBUNAL, THALASSERY .................... APPELLANT/PETITIONER ------------------------------------- SUDHAKARAN K., AGED 33 YEARS, S/O.ALLAKKOTTU MANNAN, RESIDING AT KANNARUVATH HOUSE, RESIDING AT ONAKKUNNU, P.O.KARIVELLUR, POWER OF ATTORNEY HOLDER, K.KERALAKUMARAN, 45 YEARS, S/O. KANNAN,ONAKUNNU, P.O.KARIVELLUR, KANNUR DISTRICT (IA.NO.6224/2001) BY ADV. SRI.M.V.AMARESAN SRI.V.N.RAMESAN NAMBISAN RESPONDENTS/ RESPONDENTS ---------------------------------------------- 1. P.V.MOHANAN, S/O. SANKARAN, PUTHIYAVEETTIL, P.O.KANKOLE, (VIA) PAYYANNUR. (* DELETED) 2. K.GANGADHARAN, S/O. SANKARA MARAR, KUTTAMATH, CHERUVATHUR, P.O.CHERUVATHUR. 3. UNITED INDIA INSURANCE CO.LTD., PAYYANNUR. * THE NAME OF THE 1ST RESPONDENT IS DELETED FROM THE PARTY ARRAY, AT THE RISK OF THE APPELLANT, VIDE ORDER DATED 04/04/08 ON I.A.875/08. BY ADV. SMT.RAJI T.BHASKAR - R3 THIS MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS APPEAL HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 10/06/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: J.B.KOSHY & P.N.RAVINDRAN, JJ. -------------------------------------- M.A.C.A.No.297 OF 2003 ------------------------------------- Dated 10th June, 2008 JUDGMENT Koshy,J . Appellant/claimant at the age of 27 sustained serious injuries in a motor accident. He filed a claim for compensation of Rs.4,00,000/=. Tribunal found that the accident occurred due to the negligence of the driver of the vehicle insured by the third respondent insurance company and directed the third respondent to deposit Rs.52,400/= with interest and proportionate costs. Only dispute is regarding the quantum of compensation. Ext.A2 is the wound certificate. As per the wound certificate, there was fracture of 7th, 8th, 9th, 10th and 11th ribs on the right side, fracture of pelvis, splenic rupture and fracture of 8th, 9th and 10th ribs on the left side. He was in hospital for 10 days. Ext.A3 is the histo-pathology report showing that there was rupture of spleen. Discharge summary shows that he was in Mangalore City Hospital Reaserch & Diagnostic Centre for 10 days and laparotomy and splenectomy were done. It is also stated that apart from splenic rupture, there was fracture of pelvis and multiple fracture of ribs etc. The injuries were severe. It is the submission of the claimant that as can be seen from Ext.A6 certificate issued from Agarwal Hospital & Trauma Centre, he was further treated in Mumbai. There also Laparotomy MACA.297/2003 2 was done. It is also submitted that he was unable to do any work for two years. He did not produce any permanent disability certificate. According to the claimant, he was a seaman employed in a ship. Ext.A8 certificate is the employment certificate which shows that in 1996-97 total amount received by him per month was 377.50 US $ out of which basic wages was 293 $ apart from the overtime allowance, leave subsistence and leave wages. Accident occurred during the period which he was on leave. He went back only after two years. The certificates produced by him show that after he went back, there was no much reduction in his monthly income. Therefore, there will not be any loss of earning capacity. But, he was unable to do work for two years. That has to be believed. The Tribunal has taken Rs.2,500/= as the monthly income and granted Rs.7,500/= as loss of wages for three months. We are of the opinion that at least basic wages of 293 US $ mentioned in Ext.A8 ought to have been accepted and taking the then exchange rate, at least Rs.10,000/= ought to have been taken as his monthly income. Even though it is stated that he was unable to do work for two years, there is no medical certificate to the effect that he was advised rest for two years. But, considering the injuries suffered, we are of the opinion that he should be granted loss of earnings for 10 months. If that be so, it will be Rs.1,00,000/=. Tribunal has granted only Rs.7,500/= (even though claimant's brother stated that the claimant has taken bed rest for one year in the house). So, claimant is entitled to Rs.92,500/= more than that was awarded MACA.297/2003 3 by the Tribunal for loss of earnings. It is the case of the claimant that Tribunal has granted only Rs.1,500/= for transportation expenses. He has to go several times for check-up in the Mangalore Hospital and he had also undergone treatment at Mumbai Hospital. Rs.1,500/= awarded was inclusive of an ambulance bill for Rs.976/- also. We are of the opinion that at least Rs.4,000/= ought to have been granted for transportation expenses and thus, he is entitled to Rs.2,500/= more under that head. Medical bills amounting to Rs.16,900/= were reimbursed as treatment expenses. Even though it was argued that compensation awarded for pain and suffering, loss of amenities etc. are meagre, considering the total amount awarded, we are not enhancing the same. Thus, the appellant is entitled to an additional amount of Rs.95,000/=. The above Rs.95,000/= should be deposited by the third respondent insurance company with 7.5% interest from the date of application till its deposit, over and above the decreed amount by the Tribunal. On deposit of the amount, appellant is allowed to withdraw the same. The appeal is partly allowed. J.B.KOSHY JUDGE P.N.RAVINDRAN JUDGE tks