IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE A.K.BASHEER & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.Q.BARKATH ALI WEDNESDAY, THE 30TH JUNE 2010 / 9TH ASHADHA 1932 MACA.No. 1482 of 2005(C) ------------------------------------- (O.P(MV).NO.1239/2001 OF MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS TRIBUNAL, MANJERI) .................... APPELLANT/PETITIONER: ------------------------------------- ABOOBACKER,AGED 35 YEARS, S/O.HAMZA,PARAKKADAVAN HOUSE, EAST KODOOR,CHATTIPARAMBA (P.O.), MALAPPURAM (DIST.,). BY ADVS. SRI.PROMY KAPRAKKATT, SRI.SUNIL NAIR PALAKKAT, SRI.K.N.ABHILASH, SMT.P.K.BEENA, SRI.K.N.VINOD KUMAR. RESPONDENTS: ------------------------ 1. E.JAYARAJ,S/O.VELAYUDHAN, HAJIYARPALLY (P.O.), MALAPPURAM DIST. 2. K.MUHAMMED KUTTY,S/O.MOOSA, KONNOLA HOUSE,MANGATTUPULAM, DOWNHILL,MALAPPURAM DIST. 3. UNITED INDIA INSURANCE CO.LTD., BRANCH OFFICE,UP HILL, MALAPPURAM DIST. R3 BY ADV. SRI.A.R.GEORGE. THIS MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS APPEAL HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 30/06/2010,THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: prv. A.K.BASHEER & P.Q. BARKATH ALI, JJ. =~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~==~=~=~= M.A.C.A. No. 1482 of 2005 =~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~==~=~=~= Dated this the 30th day of June, 2010 JUDGMENT Barkath Ali, J. In this appeal under section 173 of the Motor Vehicles Act claimant in O.P.(MV) No.1239 of 2001 of the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Manjeri challenges the judgment and award of the Tribunal dated June 25, 2005 awarding a compensation of Rs.1,48,851/- for the loss caused to the claimant, on account of the injury sustained by him in a motor accident. 2. The facts leading to this appeal, in brief, are these:- Claimant was aged 32 at the time of the accident and used to earn Rs.4,500/- per month as a Cleaner of a lorry. The claimant was working as a Cleaner in a tipper lorry. On November 14, 2001 at 2 p.m. he was unloading earth from the lorry. While he was removing stones from the way, the first respondent, driver of the tipper lorry, took the lorry reverse in a rash and negligent manner and MACA 1482/2005 2 knocked him down. The claimant sustained serious injuries. First respondent as the driver, second respondent as the owner and third respondent as the insurer of the tipper lorry are jointly and severally liable to pay compensation to the claimant, as the accident occurred due to the negligence on the part of the first respondent. The claimant claimed a compensation of Rs.3 lakhs. 3. Respondents 1 and 2, driver and owner of the offending tipper lorry, remained absent and they were set ex parte by the Tribunal. The third respondent insurer filed a written statement, admitting the policy. 4. The claimant was examined as PW1 and Exts. A1 to A7 were marked on the side of the claimant. No evidence was adduced by the respondents. The Tribunal, on an appreciation of the evidence, found that the accident occurred due to negligence on the part of the first respondent and awarded a compensation of Rs.1,48,851/- with interest at the rate of 6% p.a. from the date of petition till realization and cost. The claimant has come up in MACA 1482/2005 3 appeal, challenging the quantum of compensation awarded by the Tribunal. 5. Heard the learned counsel for the claimant and learned counsel for the Insurance Company. 6. The accident is not disputed. The finding of the Tribunal that the accident occurred due to the negligence on the part of the first respondent is not seriously challenged. 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 revealed from Ext.A2 copy of the wound certificate, Ext.A3 series discharge cards and Ext.A4 series discharge summary cards:- 1) Tenderness right hip. 2) Fracture pelvis, superior and inferior pubic rami. 3) Rupture urethra. 4) Avulsion fracture body of L4 vertebra injuries. MACA 1482/2005 4 In Ext.X1 certificate of disability of the Medical Board has certified that the claimant has now a disability of 50%. At present he has no control when passing urine. 8. The Tribunal awarded a total compensation of Rs.1,48,851/-. Break up of the compensation awarded is as under:- Transport to hospital : Rs. 500/- Extra nourishment : Rs. 6,300/- and bystanders expenses. Medical expenses : Rs. 62,051/- Pain and suffering : Rs. 20,000/- Loss of amenities : Rs. 60,000/- and enjoyment of life. ------------------ Total : Rs.1,48,851/- ======= 9. The learned counsel for the appellant sought enhancement of compensation for the disability caused, for pain and suffering and for loss of amenities and enjoyment in life. 10. The Tribunal awarded Rs.60,000/- for loss of amenities. But no compensation was seen awarded for the disability caused. Taking into consideration the nature of MACA 1482/2005 5 injuries sustained, we feel that a compensation of Rs.30,000/- would be reasonable for the loss of amenities and enjoyment in life, instead of Rs.60,000/- awarded by the Tribunal. 11. As regards the disability caused, we feel that monthly income of the claimant can reasonably be fixed at Rs.2,500/-. As the claimant was aged 32 at the time of the accident, proper multiplier of this case would be 17. Thus, for the disability caused, the claimant is entitled to a compensation of Rs.90,000/- (Rs.2,500/- x 12 x 17 x 50%). 12. For pain and suffering endured by the claimant, Rs.20,000/- was awarded by the Tribunal, which appears to be inadequate. For pain and suffering endured by the claimant, we feel that a compensation of Rs.30,000/- would be reasonable. Thus, on this count, the claimant is entitled for an additional compensation of Rs.10,000/-. 13. There is another aspect in this case. Nature of injuries sustained by the claimant shows that he must have been disabled for six months. Therefore, during that period, MACA 1482/2005 6 he is entitled to a compensation of Rs.15,000/- for the loss of earnings for six months (Rs.2,500/- x 6). 14. The learned counsel for the claimant argued that compensation should be awarded for the future treatment expenses of the claimant. The claimant has now no control over passing urine. He has to continue treatment life long. Therefore, we feel that a compensation of Rs.25,000/- would be reasonable for the future treatment expenses. As regards the compensation awarded under other heads, we find the same to be reasonable and therefore, we are not disturbing the same. 15. In the result, the claimant is entitled to an additional compensation of Rs.1,10,000/-. The Tribunal awarded interest only @6% per annum, which appears to be very low. The claimant is entitled to interest @ 7.5% per annum from the date of petition till realization for the compensation already awarded and for the enhanced compensation. He is entitled to proportionate cost. The third respondent being the insurer of the offending tipper MACA 1482/2005 7 lorry shall deposit the amount 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