IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE R.BASANT & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE N.K.BALAKRISHNAN TUESDAY, THE 12TH JULY 2011 / 21ST ASHADHA 1933 MACA.No. 1023 of 2005() ------------------------------ OPMV.558/1999 of MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS TRIBUNAL, KASARAGOD .................... APPELLANT(S): PETITIONER: ----------------------------------- BALAKRISHNA SADHANANDA GAMBHIRA, AGED 39 YEARS, S/O. MONU GAMBIRA, DAMBEKANA HOUSE, POST KATTUKUKKE, VIA. PERALA OF KASARAGOD TALUK. BY ADV. SRI.T.K.VIPINDAS RESPONDENT(S):RESPONDENTS -------------------------------------- * 1. MUHAMMED AGED 31 YEARS, S/O. ABDUL REHMAN, ARLAPADAVU VILLAGE & P.O., PUTTUR TALUK, D.K. DISTRICT, KARNATAKA STATE.(DELETED) 2. ARVINDA RAI, S/O. BATYAPPA RAI, SURAMBAILOO PANJAE VILLAGE & P.O., PUTTUR TALUK, D.K. DISTRICT, KARNATAKA STATE. 3. THE BRANCH MANAGER, ORIENTAL INSURANCE COMPANY LTD., PUTTUR, POST PUTTUR, D.K. DISTRICT, KARNATAKA. * THE IST RESPONDENT IS DELETED FROM THE PARTY ARRAY AS PER ORDERS DATED 19/05/2010 IN I.A. NO.1153/2010 AT THE RISK OF THE APPELLANT. R3 BY ADV. SRI.GEORGE CHERIAN (THIRUVALLA) THIS MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS APPEAL HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 12/07/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: svs R. BASANT & N.K.BALAKRISHNAN, JJ. ---------------------------------------------------- C.M.Appl.No.1427 of 2005 and M.A.C.A.No.1023 of 2005 ---------------------------------------------------- Dated this the 12th day of July, 2011 Order/Judgment Basant, J. C.M.Appl.No.1427 of 2005 This petition is to condone the delay of 485 days in filing the appeal. Notwithstanding the opposition, we take a lenient view. Petition allowed and the delay is condoned. M.A.C.A.No.1023 of 2005 Claimant is the appellant. He claimed compensation for personal injury suffered by him in a motor vehicles accident which took place on 11.5.1997. Against a total claim of Rs.3 lakhs, the Tribunal awarded an amount of Rs.58,000/- as compensation as per the details shown below: 1) Loss of earnings (2500x 4) - Rs.10,000 2) Transport to hospital, Extra-nourishment, damage to clothing, bystanders expenses - Rs.8,000 3) Medical Expenses - Rs.15,000 4) Pain and suffering - Rs.15,000 5) Physical disability/loss of amenities - Rs.10,000 -------------- Total - Rs.58,000/- ========= C.M.Appl.1427/05 & MACA 1023/05 2 2. We have heard learned counsel for the appellant and the learned counsel for the insurance company/third respondent. 3. The challenge is only against the quantum of compensation awarded. Called upon to be specific, the learned counsel for the appellant assails the compensation awarded under the heads of loss of earnings, pain and suffering and physical disability/loss of amenities. 4. The appellant and his wife were travelling in a motor cycle. The appellant was the rider. The claim of his wife is disposed by judgment in M.A.C.A.No.1022 of 2005 by us by a separate judgment today. Learned counsel for the appellant contends that the monthly income of the appellant reckoned by the Tribunal is too low. His wife was drawing a monthly salary of Rs.4370/- as a teacher. The appellant was employed as manager in a finance company. He was also working as LIC Agent. The salary certificate issued by his employer shows that his monthly income was Rs.4500/-. In addition, he was getting income as a LIC Agent, the details of which were not satisfactorily established before the Tribunal. He has suffered fracture on the right frontal C.M.Appl.1427/05 & MACA 1023/05 3 bone and the occipital bone, dislocation of right hip with diastasis of interpubic joint and fracture of the right fibula. He was an inpatient from 11.5.1997 to 4.6.1997. Though it was asserted that he had suffered physical disability, no documents have been produced to prove such disability, if any. 5. Having rendered our anxious consideration to all the relevant inputs, we are not persuaded to agree that any further amount is liable to be awarded under the heads of pain and suffering and physical disability/loss of amenities. However, we feel that considering the totality of circumstances, the monthly earnings of the appellant could safely have been reckoned at Rs.4500/- per mensem. The appellant is consequently entitled for enhancement on that head alone. The appellant is thus found entitled to a further amount of Rs.8,000/- (Rs.4500 x 4 minus 10,000) in addition to the amounts already awarded by the Tribunal. 6. In the result: a) The appeal is allowed in part. b) The appellant is found entitled to a further C.M.Appl.1427/05 & MACA 1023/05 4 amount of Rs.8,000/- in addition to the amounts awarded by the Tribunal. c) The entire amount of compensation shall carry interest at the rate and for the period as directed by the Tribunal. d) All other directions of the Tribunal are upheld. R.BASANT, JUDGE. N.K.BALAKRISHNAN, JUDGE. srd C.M.Appl.1427/05 & MACA 1023/05 5