IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE J.B.KOSHY & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE THOMAS P.JOSEPH TUESDAY, THE 19TH AUGUST 2008 / 28TH SRAVANA 1930 MACA.No. 336 of 2003() --------------------------------- OPMV.498/1997 OF MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS TRIBUNAL, THALASSERY .................... APPELLANT/PETITIONER: -------------------------------------- AJITH VADAVATHI, S/O. M.NARAYANAN, THEKKANTHOTTATHIL HOUSE, P.O. KOTTAI, KANNUR DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.GRASHIOUS KURIAKOSE SRI.GEORGE MATHEWS RESPONDENTS: RESPONDENTS: ----------------------------------------------- 1. K.C.RAJEEVAN, KARTHYADATH HOUSE, PODIKUNDU, P.O. PALLIKKUNNU, KANNUR DISTRICT. (* DELETED) 2. UNITED INDIA INSURANCE CO. LTD., REPRESENTED BY ITS DIVISIONAL MANAGER, KANNUR DISTRICT. 3. MUTTY SAJITH, S/O. MUTHU, CHIRAKKAL AMSOM, PANANKAVU DESOM, KANNUR DISTRICT. (* DELETED) * THE NAME OF R1 AND R3 ARE DELETED FROM THE PARTY ARRAY AS PER ORDER DATED 17/11/06 IN I.A.2191/2006. ADV. SMT.P.A.REZIYA FOR R2 THIS MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS APPEAL HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 19/08/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: Rs/ J.B. KOSHY & THOMAS P.JOSEPH, JJ. ------------------------------------------------------------ M.A.C.A.NO: 336 OF 2003 ----------------------------------------------------------- Dated this the 19th August, 2008. JUDGMENT Koshy, J. The appellant claimant at the age of 21 sustained very serious injuries in a motor accident on 11.1.1997. As a result of the accident his right leg below knee was amputated. This was done in City Hospital. He had to go for review in A.K.G.Hospital, Kannur on nine occasions. He was an inpatient treatment initially for 58 days. Against a claim of Rs.8,50,000/- Tribunal granted only an amount of Rs.2,08,800/- with 9% interest per annum including medical expenses. The Tribunal found that accident occurred due to the negligence of driver of the vehicle insured by the second respondent. Dispute is regarding the quantum of compensation. According to the claimant he was a motor mechanic. He had Ext.A6 driving licence and according to the oral evidence he was getting Rs.3,000/- per month at the time of accident. He produced Ext.A11 salary certificate which says that his monthly salary was only Rs.2,000/-. The accident took place on 11.1.1997. He was a motor mechanic. According to him he was intending to go abroad. But no evidence was adduced to prove the same. Further, considering the future prospects and considering Ext.A2 certificate which was not discredited, we are of the opinion that Tribunal ought to have accepted Rs.2,000/- as monthly income. Taking guidance from the Second M.A.C.A.336/03 2 Schedule 17 was fixed as the multiplier. Even though it is argued that the multiplier of 18 should be taken for motor accident victims, aged between 21 and 25, we are of the view that since the Tribunal has fixed the multiplier based on the Second Schedule, the multiplier needs no enhancement. His right leg below knee was amputated Considering the medical certificate compensation for 30% disability was awarded. Even though physical disability is 30%, he lost all the abilities of future prospects. In view of the medical certificate and claim raised by the petitioner only compensation need be granted is at 30%. Therefore compensation payable for loss of earning will be Rs.1,22,400/- (for permanent disability), 2000x12x30/100x17. After deducting Rs.91,800/- awarded by the Tribunal for permanent disability and loss of earning power, additional compensation payable under the head will be Rs.30,600/-. It is submitted that medical expenses awarded was very low. According to the claimant total medical bills produced was Rs.63,235/-. It is the case of the petitioner that Tribunal did not take into account the medical certificates produced after filing of the claim petition. It was held by the Supreme Court in Nagappa v. Gurudayal M.A.C.A.336/03 3 Singh and others {2002 AIR SCW 5348} that future medical facilities also should be granted and award need not be restricted to the amounts mentioned in the claim petition as it is the duty of the Tribunal to grant just and reasonable compensation. It is argued that being an amputation below knee he needed artificial legs and according to the learned counsel for the appellant he will have to incur at least Rs.40,000/- more for artificial legs. It is also pointed out that during the long 58 days of treatment he incurred many expenses covered by bills. Taking all these aspects, we award Rs.25,000/- more for medical expenses as well as for purchase of artificial legs etc. Tribunal has awarded only Rs.15,000/- for pain and suffering. Apart from amputation, skin therapy was also done. For 58 days he was hospitalised. Subsequently also he was under treatment. Taking all these aspects, we award Rs.10,000/- more for pain and suffering, as additional amount. Tribunal found that he was unable to do any work for one year during the period of treatment, but calculated actual loss of earnings taking into account that his monthly income was only Rs.1,500/-. Since we have increased monthly income to Rs.2,000/- he is entitled to additional M.A.C.A.336/03 4 amount of Rs.6,000/-. So additional compensation payable will be Rs.71,600/- (Rupees seventy one thousand six hundred only) . 2. The above amount should be deposited by the second respondent-insurance company with 7.5% interest from the date of application till realisation over and above the compensation deposited before the Tribunal. On deposit of the amount, appellant is allowed to withdraw the same. J.B.KOSHY Judge THOMAS P. JOSEPH Judge jj J.B.KOSHY & THOMAS P. JOSEPH, JJ. --------------------------------- M.A.C.A.NO: 336 OF 2003 --------------------------------- JUDGMENT Dated: 19th August, 2008.