IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE A.K.BASHEER & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.Q.BARKATH ALI TUESDAY, THE 10TH AUGUST 2010 / 19TH SRAVANA 1932 MACA.No. 2147 of 2009() ----------------------- OPMV.152/2006 of MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS TRIBUNAL, VADAKARA .................... APPELLANT(S): PETITIONER ---------------------------------------- RAJAN, AGED 45 YEARS,S/O.KELAPPAN, KIZHAKKAYIL HOUSE,MOODADI, MUCHUKUNNU AMSOM DESOM, KOYILANDY TALUK,KOZHIKODE DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.P.R.SREEJITH RESPONDENT(S): RESPONDENTS ----------------------------------------------- 1. K.RAVEENDRAN NAIR,S/O.KRISHNAKURUP, RENJITH BHAVAN,MAVILAYI,PUDUVACHERRY P.O., KANNUR DISTRICT. (DRIVER AND R.C.OWNER OF CAR KET.7054). 2. THE NEW INDIA ASSURANCE COMPANY LTD., SADOO BUILDING,IST FLOOR,NEAR MUNICIPAL BUS STAND, KANNUR.POLICY NO:760801/31/04/02424, (INSURER OF CAR KET.7054). (PERIOD OF VALIDITY 11.11.2004 TO 10.11.2005) ADV. SMT.P.K.SANTHAMMA FOR R2 THIS MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS APPEAL HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 10/08/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: pkk A.K. BASHEER & P.Q. BARKATH ALI, JJ. ------------------------------------- M.A.C.A NO. 2147 OF 2009 --------------------------- DATED THIS THE 10TH DAY OF AUGUST, 2010 J U D G M E N T _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ Barkath Ali, J. The appellant is the claimant in OP (MV) No. 152/2006 on the file of Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Vadakara. He sustained the following injuries in a motor accident that occurred on June 4, 2005. a)Lacerated wound on left foot. b)Grade III fracture of 1st and 5th metatarsal. c)Grade 1 mobility for 2 teeth and d)Grade II mobility for one teeth and fracture of mandible. 2. The accident happened while the appellant was riding his motor cycle bearing registration No. KL18 187, he was knocked down by a car bearing registration No. KET 7054 owned and driven by first respondent. Alleging negligence against first respondent, the claimant filed O.P under Section 166 of Motor Vehicles Act before the M.A.C.T, Vadakara claiming a compensation M.A.C.A NO. 2147 OF 2009 2 of two lakhs. 3. The 1st respondent, the owner cum driver of the offending car remained absent and was set ex-parte by the Tribunal. The 2nd respondent, the insurer of the offending car admitted the policy but contended that there was also negligence on the part of the claimant. 4. PW1 was examined and Exhibits A1 to A7 were marked on the side of the claimant. On the side of contesting 2nd respondent, Ext.B1 was marked before the Tribunal. On an appreciation of evidence, the Tribunal found that the accident occurred due to the negligence on the part of the first respondent and awarded a compensation of Rs. 35,181/- with interest at the rate of 7.5% per annum from the date of petition till realization and a cost of Rs. 1,000/-. The claimant has now come up in appeal challenging the quantum of compensation awarded by the Tribunal. 5. Heard the counsel for the appellant and counsel for the 2nd respondent, Insurance Company. M.A.C.A NO. 2147 OF 2009 3 6. The accident is not disputed. The finding of the Tribunal that the accident occurred due to the negligence on the part of the 1st respondent, the owner cum driver of the offending car 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 Tribunal awarded a total compensation of Rs. 35,181/-. The break up of the compensation awarded is as under: Pain and suffering : Rs. 15,000 Hospital expenses : Rs. 3,400 including expenses for by-stander and extra nourishment. Transportation : Rs. 1,000 Mental shock and : Rs. 8,000 inconvenience Medical expenses : Rs. 7,500 Bills : Rs. 280.60 8. The counsel for the claimant sought enhancement of compensation awarded by the Tribunal M.A.C.A NO. 2147 OF 2009 4 for loss of amenities and enjoyment of life. The counsel pointed out that no compensation was awarded for disability caused. The claimant was aged 45 at the time of accident. PW1 testified that he was a mason. The Tribunal took his monthly income as Rs. 2500/- which appears to be reasonable. Ext.A2, the wound certificate and Ext.A3, discharge card show that the claimant has suffered a fracture of mandible and some of his teeth were lost. He had undergone treatment at Medical College Hospital, Kozhikode from 4.6.2005 to 21.6.2005. Taking into consideration all these aspects, we feel that for the disability caused, a compensation of Rs. 30,000/-would be reasonable. 9. No compensation was seen awarded for loss of amenities and enjoyment of life. Taking into consideration of nature of injuries sustained, we feel that a compensation of Rs. 10,000/- would be reasonable for loss of amenities and enjoyment of life. As regards, the compensation awarded under other heads, we find the same to be reasonable and therefore, we are not disturbing the same. M.A.C.A NO. 2147 OF 2009 5 10. Thus, the claimant is entitled to an additional compensation of Rs. 40,000/-. He is entitled to interest at the rate of 7.5% per annum from the date of petition till realization and proportionate cost. The 2nd respondent, being the insurer of the offending vehicle shall deposit the amount before the Tribunal within two months from the date of receipt of copy of this judgment. 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 PKK