IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE A.K.BASHEER & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.Q.BARKATH ALI MONDAY, THE 21ST JUNE 2010 / 31ST JYAISTHA 1932 MACA.No. 146 of 2004() ---------------------- OPMV.1971/1996 of MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS TRIBUNAL, TIRUR .................... APPELLANT/PETITIONER: ----------------------------------------- K.SHAMSUDHEEN, S/O. ALIKUTTY, AGED 26 YEARS, KAZHUNGIL HOUSE, CHERUSSOLA P.O., KERALA. BY ADV. SRI.K.P.MUJEEB RESPONDENT(S): RESPONDENTS: ---------------------------------------------------- 1. M.K.ANILKUMAR, KAMMADAN HOUSE, KOTTAKKAL P.O. (OWNER) 2. USMAN P., PANNAKKOTTIL HOUSE, PULLIKKODE, KOTTAKKAL P.O. (DRIVER) 3. NATIONAL INSURANCE CO.LTD. B/O. KORAMBAYIL ARCADE, MANJERI. 4. C.SAIDALAVI HAJI, KERALA HOUSE, PUNNATHALA P.O., VALANCHERI (OWNER OF JEEP KLL 520) 5. ASHRAF K.K., KALAMBAMKOTTARATHIL HOUSE, VALIYAKUNNU P.O. (DRIVER OF JEEP KLL 520) 6. NEW INDIA ASSURANCE CO.LTD., S/O. CATHOLIC CENTRE, UP HILL, MALAPPURAM. R3 BY ADV. SMT.SARAH SALVY R6 BY ADVS.SRI.KKM.SHERIF, SRI.A.A.ZIYAD RAHMAN. THIS MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS APPEAL HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 21/06/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: Kss A.K.BAHSEER & P.Q.BARKATH ALI, JJ. =~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~= M.A.C.A. No. 146 of 2004 =~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~= Dated this the 21st day of June, 2010 JUDGMENT Barkath Ali, J. In this appeal under Section 173 of Motor Vehicles Act, the claimant in O.P. (MV) No.1971 of 1996 of Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Tirur challenges the judgment and award of the Tribunal dated July 30, 2003 awarding a compensation of Rs.1,19,000/- for the loss caused to him on account of the injuries sustained by him in a motor accident. 2. The facts leading to this appeal, in brief, are these:- The claimant was aged 26 at the time of the accident and used to earn Rs.1,500/- per month as an Electrical Wireman. On November 1, 1994 at about 11.30 a.m. the claimant was travelling in an auto-rickshaw bearing registration No.KL-10A/3697 from Cherussola to Kottakkal. The auto-rickshaw was driven by second respondent. When they reached near Parambil Angadi, it dashed against a jeep bearing registration No.KLL-520 and capsized. The claimant MACA 146/2004 2 sustained serious injuries. According to the claimant, the accident occurred due to the rash and negligent driving of the auto-rickshaw and jeep by respondents 2 and 5 respectively. First respondent as the owner, second respondent as the driver and third respondent as the insurer of the offending auto-rickshaw and respondents 4 to 6 as the owner, driver and insurer of the offending jeep are jointly and severally liable to pay compensation to the claimant. The claimant claimed a compensation of Rs.2 lakhs. 3. Respondents 1 and 2, the owner and driver of the auto-rickshaw, remained absent and were set ex parte by the Tribunal. Respondents 4 and 5, owner and driver of the jeep, though entered appearance, did not file any written statement. Respondents 3 and 6, insurer of the respective vehicles, filed separate written statements, admitting the accident, but attributing negligence to the driver of the other vehicle. 4. Exts.A1 to A11 were marked on the side of the MACA 146/2004 3 claimant before the Tribunal. No evidence was adduced by the respondents. The Tribunal, on an appreciation of evidence, found that the accident occurred due to the negligence on the part of the second respondent and awarded a compensation of Rs.1,19,000/- with interest @ 9% per annum from the date of petition till realization and proportionate costs against respondents 1 to 3. The claimant has now come up in appeal challenging the quantum of compensation awarded by the Tribunal. 5. Heard the counsel for the appellant/claimant and the counsel for respondents 3 and 6/the Insurance Companies. 6. The accident is not disputed. The finding of the Tribunal that the accident occurred due to the negligence on the part of the second respondent 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 claimant sustained the following injuries as MACA 146/2004 4 revealed from Ext.A3 copy of wound certificate:- 1) Compound fracture shaft of femur. 2) Abrasion on the front of left knee, left clavicle, left forearm. 3) Punctured wound on the left thigh. Ext.A7 treatment-cum-disability certificate showed that k- nailing and bone grafting were done. It is certified therein that the claimant has 25% disability. 8. The Tribunal awarded a total compensation of Rs.1,19,000/-. Break up of the compensation awarded is as under :- Loss of earning : Rs. 7,000/- Transportation expense : Rs. 1,500/- Extra-nourishment : Rs. 1,500/- Medical expense : Rs. 40,000/- Pain and sufferings : Rs. 15,000/- Loss of earning power : Rs. 54,000/- -------------------- Total : Rs.1,19,000/- ======== 9. The learned counsel for appellant sought enhancement of compensation for the disability caused. He has also pointed out that no compensation was awarded for MACA 146/2004 5 loss of amenities and enjoyment in life. 10. The Tribunal took the monthly income of the claimant as Rs.1,000/-, adopted a multiplier of 18, took the percentage of disability as 25% and awarded Rs.54,000/- for the disability caused. The claimant was aged 26 and used to earn Rs.4,000/- per month as an Electrical Wireman, according to him. Taking into consideration all these aspects, we feel that his monthly income can reasonably be fixed at Rs.1,250/-. Percentage of disability as 25% and multiplier as 18 taken by the Tribunal are not seriously disputed. Therefore, for the disability caused and for the consequential loss of earning power, the claimant is entitled to a compensation of Rs.67,500/- (Rs.1,250/- x 12 x 18 x 25%). Thus, on this count, the claimant is entitled to an additional compensation of Rs.13,500/-. 11. No compensation was awarded towards loss of amenities and enjoyment in life. Having regard to the nature of the injuries sustained, we feel that a compensation of Rs.10,000/- would be reasonable on this MACA 146/2004 6 count. As regards the compensation granted under other heads, we find the same to be reasonable and we are not disturbing the same. 12. In the result, the claimant is found entitled to an additional compensation of Rs.23,500/-. He is entitled to interest @ 9% per annum from the date of petition till realization and proportionate cost. The third respondent being the insurer of the offending auto-rickshaw shall deposit the amount before the Tribunal 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.