IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE J.B.KOSHY & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.N.RAVINDRAN WEDNESDAY, THE 18TH JUNE 2008 / 28TH JYAISHTA 1930 MFA.No. 193 of 2002() ----------------------------- OPMV.1039/1997 of ADDL. MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS TRIBUNAL, ALAPPUZHA .................... APPELLANT/PETITIONER ------------------------------------- RADHAKRISHNA MENON, S/O. NARAYANA MENON, VADAKLKE PARATIL HOUSE, NORTH ARYAD, ALAPPUZHA. BY ADV. SRI.J.OM PRAKASH RESPONDENTS/ RESPONDENTS ---------------------------------------------- 1. SREEKUMAR, S/O. GOPALAN, KUNNELPURATH VEEDU, KALLARA MURI, KADACKAL PANCHYATH, KADACKAL P.O., KOLLAM. 2. C.G.CHARLE, CHATHUPARAMBIL VEEDU, AROOR P.O., CHERTHALA TALUK, ALAPPUZHA DISTRICT. 3. THE BRANCH MANAGER, UNITED INDIA INSURANCE CO.LTD., LAYAM ROAD, TRIPOONITHARA BRANCH, TRIPUNITHARA P.O., ERNAKULAM. BY ADV. SRI.T.MADHU - R2 SMT.P.A.REZIYA - R3 THIS MISC. FIRST APPEAL HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 18/06/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: J.B. KOSHY & P.N. RAVINDRAN, JJ. ---------------------------------------------------- M.F.A.NO.193 OF 2002 ---------------------------------------------------- Dated this the 18th day of June, 2008. JUDGMENT Koshy, J: The appellant/claimant sustained injuries in a motor accident on 4.3.1997. The Tribunal found that the accident occurred due to the negligence of the driver of the vehicle insured by the 3rd respondent insurance company. Against a claim of Rs. Five lakhs, compensation awarded including reimbursement of medical expenses was only Rs.1,06,500/=. The only dispute is regarding the quantum of compensation. We are considering that only. 2. Ext.A5 would show that there was bleeding from left ear. There was multiple irregular laceration at the root of nose and frontal region towards ® side injury varying from 1x.25x.25 cm to 2.5x.5x.5 cm exposing skull bone in some part, abraded contusion ® shoulder region, multiple tiny abrasions on both bone dorsum over the fingers and fracture crown upper incisor teeth. Ext.A16 is the scan report which shows that it was a case of head injury with multiple fracture of the base of skull with hemorrhagic cerebellar contusion with? MFA.193/2002 . 2 Intra ventricular Hemorrhage. Ext.A7 is an MRI report. It would show that there was small hematoma in the mid line between the cerebellar hemispheres? Extramural. Ext.A8 is the first page of the S.S.L.C book produced to show that t he date of birth of the petitioner is 27.5.1966. Ext.A9 is the photocopy of the discharge certificate. It would show that the petitioner had fracture ® maxilla with hemosinus, (2) leniar fracture base of skull extending from the optic foramen to foremen margin with distraction of fragment, (3) multiple fracture of foramen margin with extension to posterior fossa (4) small mid line hematoma between the cerebellar hemasinus. Dental consultation revealed fracture of crown upper incisors and the petitioner was treated conservatively. Ext.A10 is the disability certificate dated 26.8.2000 issued by Dr. Bhavadasan, Professor, Department of Neurosurgery where it is certified that the petitioner had right sided facial nerve paralysis lower motov neuron type (2) loss of hearing of right ear, (3) artificial denture due to loss of teeth, (4) imbalance of gait while walking in straight line, (5) loss of memory more to recent events, (6) behavioural abnormality due to excessive rage and the permanent disability was assessed at 25%. Merely because the doctor was not examined, the Tribunal fixed the disability at 20%. The appellant was a Welder by profession. He lost his employment MFA.193/2002 . 3 because of the accident. In any event, the disability certificate was marked by the court and there was no contra evidence. The Tribunal ought to have been granted compensation for 25% disability. According to the claimant, he was getting Rs.3,500/= as monthly income as a Welder. He was aged 30 years at the time of the accident. 17 is the apt multiplier taking guidance from 2nd schedule. The Tribunal fixed his monthly income as Rs.2,000/=. 3. Even if salary certificate was not accepted, the Tribunal ought to have found that being a Welder he must get at least Rs.100/= per day and for 25 days he must get Rs.2,500/=. So, Rs.2,500/= is fixed as his monthly income. For 25% disability, the compensation payable will be Rs.1,27,500/= (2500x12x25%x17). The Tribunal has awarded only Rs.72,000/=. So, additional compensation for disability and loss of earning capacity will be Rs,55,500/=. For loss of earnings for three months period of treatment, the Tribunal has awarded Rs.6,000/=. Since, we enhanced the salary by Rs.500/=, he is entitled to Rs.1,500/= on that count. Even though it was contended that the compensation awarded for pain and sufferings and medical expenses are very meager, considering the total amount granted, we are not enhancing the same. Therefore, additional amount of MFA.193/2002 . 4 Rs.57,000/= should be deposited by the 3rd respondent insurance company with 7% interest from the date of application till the date of deposit over and above the decreed amount. On deposit of the said amount, the appellant is allowed to withdraw the same. J.B. KOSHY, JUDGE. P.N. RAVINDRAN, JUDGE. cl MFA.193/2002 . 5 J.B. KOSHY & P.N. RAVINDRAN, JJ. M.F.A.NO.193 OF 2002 JUDGMENT 18th day of June, 2008.