IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE A.K.BASHEER & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.Q.BARKATH ALI THURSDAY, THE 29TH JULY 2010 / 7TH SRAVANA 1932 MACA.No. 773 of 2004() ---------------------- OPMV.1136/2000 of MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS TRIBUNAL, KOTTAYAM .................... APPELLANT(S): APPELLANT/PETITIONER ---------------------------------- ANUKOOL S/O. AUGUSTINE, AGED 5 YEARS (MINOR) KARUPAPPARAMBIL HOUSE, NEAR KURCHI VILLAGE OFFICE, KURCHI KARA, KURCHI VILLAGE, REPRESENTED BY FATHER & NEXT FRIEND AUGUSTINE S/O K.GEORGE, KARUVAPARAMBIL HOUSE, KURCHI KARA. BY ADV. SRI.K.A.HASSIM SRI.M.I.ISMAIL RESPONDENT(S): RESPONDENTS -------------------------- 1. SUNILKUMAR S/O. GOPALAN, PARAPPARAMBIL HOUSE, PATHAMATTOM KARA, PANACHIKKADU VILLAGE. 2. P.S.KURIAKOSE, KUMBADIL HOUSE, PATHAMUTTOM, PANACHIKKADU VILLAGE, KOTTAYAM. 3. THE ORIENTAL INSURANCE COMPANY LTD., BRANCH, KOTTAYAM. 4. REJI A.V., S/O. VASAPPAN, KAVILKIZHAKKETHIL HOUSE, NEELAMPEROOR, KURICHI. 5. NATIONAL INSURANCE COMPANY LTD., BRANCH, CHANGANACHERRY. ADV. SRI.M.JACOB MURICKAN FOR R3 THIS MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS APPEAL HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 29/07/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: PKK A.K. BASHEER & P.Q. BARKATH ALI, JJ. ---------------------------------------------------------- M.A.C.A No. 773 OF 2004 ------------------------------------- DATED THIS THE 29TH DAY OF JULY, 2010 JUDGMENT Barkath Ali, J. In this appeal under Section 173 of Motor Vehicles Act, the claimant in Op(MV) No. 1136/2000 on the file of Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Kottayam challenges the judgment and award of the Tribunal dated January 31, 2004 awarding a compensation of Rs. 14,500/- for the loss caused to the claimant on account of the injuries sustained by him in a motor accident. 2. The appellant/ claimant is a boy aged 5 represented by his next friend, father. He sustained fracture to the temporal bone in a motor accident which occurred on April 4,2000 at about 4.45 p.m. While he was travelling in an autorikshaw bearing registration No. KL5P/4397 driven by one Aji, it collided head on with a bus bearing registration No. KL5F/1476 driven by the first respondent. Claiming a compensation of Rs. 2 ½ lakhs he filed OP before the Tribunal under Section 166 of M.V. Act M.A.C.A No. 773 OF 2004 2 alleging negligence against the first respondent, the driver of the offending bus. 3. Respondents 1 and 2, driver and owner of the offending bus remained absent and were set ex-parte by the Tribunal. The 3rd respondent, insurer of the offending bus filed a written statement admitting the policy and further contended that there was also negligence on the part of the driver of the autorickshaw. The owner and insurer of the autorickshaw were made formal parties in the O.P as respondents Nos. 4 and 5. 4. This O.P was tried jointly along with two other O.Ps filed by another injured person and the legal heirs of the deceased. Exts. A1 to A46 were marked on the side of the claimants. No evidence was adduced by the contesting 3rd respondent. On an appreciation of evidence, the Tribunal found that the accident occurred due to the negligence of the driver of the offending bus and awarded a compensation of Rs. 14,500/- with interest at the rate of 6% per annum from the date of petition till realization and proportionate cost. The claimant has M.A.C.A No. 773 OF 2004 3 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 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, the driver of the offending bus 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 a fracture to the temporal bone. The Tribunal awarded a compensation of Rs. 14,500/-. The break up of the compensation awarded is as under: Pain and suffering : Rs. 10,000 Treatment expenses : Rs. 2,500 Transportation and : Rs. 1,500 bystander expenses Extra nourishment : Rs. 500 ---------- Total : Rs. 14,500 ====== M.A.C.A No. 773 OF 2004 4 8. The counsel for the claimant sought enhancement of the compensation under various heads. 9. Taking into account the nature of injuries sustained and the period of treatment the claimant has undergone, we feel that the compensation awarded by the Tribunal is just and reasonable. 10. There is another aspect in this case. The Tribunal did not award any compensation for loss of amenities and enjoyment of life. Having regard to the nature of injuries sustained, a compensation of Rs. 2,500/- would be reasonable for loss of amenities and enjoyment of life. 11. In the result, the claimant is entitled to an additional compensation of Rs. 2,500/-. The Tribunal awarded interest only at 6% per annum which appears to be very low. Therefore, the claimant is entitled to an interest at the rate of 7.5% per annum from the date of petition till realization for the compensation already awarded and for enhanced compensation and proportionate cost. The 3rd respondent, being the insurer of M.A.C.A No. 773 OF 2004 5 the offending vehicle shall deposit the amount within two months from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment before the Tribunal 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 PKK