IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE R.BASANT & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE C.T.RAVIKUMAR MONDAY, THE 6TH APRIL 2009 / 16TH CHAITHRA 1931 MACA.No. 1166 of 2007() ----------------------- OPMV.223/2001 of MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS TRIBUNAL, IRINJALAKUDA .................... APPELLANT(S): PETITIONER: ------------------------- SHAJI M.V., S/O.VIJAYAN, MURUKUMTHARA HOUSE, P.O.KOORIKUZHI, KAIPAMANGALAM, THRISSUR. (INJURED) BY ADV. SRI.N.KRISHNANKUTTY PILLAI RESPONDENT(S): DEFENDANTS; -------------------------- 1. UNNIKRISHNAN.K.N., S/O.NARAYANAN, KANNAMPARAMBIL HOUSE, P.O.KOORIKUZHI, THRISSUR. (OWNER AND DRIVER OF AUTORICKSHAW KL-8/H-2376). 2. THE MANAGER, NEW INDIA ASSURANCE CO.LTD. S.S.N.SHOPPING COMPLEX, TEMPLE ROAD, THRIPRAYAR, NATTIKA.P.P., THRISSUR DISTRICT. (INSURER). ADV. SRI.MATHEWS JACOB, SENIOR ADVOCATE FOR R2 SRI.P.JACOB MATHEW FOR R2 THIS MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS APPEAL HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 06/04/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: R. BASANT & C.T. RAVIKUMAR, JJ. ------------------------------------------------- M.A.C.A. No.1166 of 2007-G ------------------------------------------------- Dated this the 6th day of April, 2009 JUDGMENT Basant,J. The claimant before the Tribunal is the appellant before us. He claimed compensation for the personal injuries suffered by him as a result of the motor accident which occurred on 11/1/01. He was aged 24 years on the date of the accident. He was a two wheeler mechanic. He claimed that he was earning an income of Rs.4,000/- per mensem at the relevant time. He had suffered fracture of the frontal bone and cerebral contusion with white matter oedema. He had also suffered fracture on the body of the sphenoid. He was an inpatient in a private hospital for a period of 40 days. He claims to have suffered visual and orthopaedic disability. The total extent of physical disability is reckoned at 27% as per the M.A.C.A. No.1166 of 2007-G -: 2 :- disability certificates – Exts.A1 and A10. He claimed a total amount of Rs.2.5 lakhs as compensation. The Tribunal, on an anxious consideration of all the relevant inputs, proceeded to award an amount of Rs.94,257/- as compensation as per the details shown below: “1. Cost of extra nourishment and wages to attendants - Rs.4,000/- 2. Medical expenses - Rs.24,857/- 3. Loss of earnings (1500 x 4) - Rs.6,000/- 4. Pain and sufferings - Rs.9,000/- 5. Loss of amenities and happiness in life - Rs.4,000/- 6. Transportation charges - Rs.500/- 7. Permanent disability (1500 x 12 x 17 x15/100) - Rs.45,900/- ---------------- Total - Rs.94,257/-” ======= Interest was directed to be paid at the rate of 6% per annum. 2. The appellant claims to be aggrieved by the impugned order. Called upon to explain the nature of the challenge which the appellant wants to mount against the impugned award, the learned counsel for the appellant assails the impugned award on various grounds. First of all, it is contended that the interest M.A.C.A. No.1166 of 2007-G -: 3 :- awarded at 6% per annum is too low. Relying on the precedents, it is contended that interest must have been awarded, at least, at 7.5% per annum. We agree with the learned counsel for the appellant. 3. The learned counsel for the appellant contends that the monthly income reckoned by the Tribunal for the purpose of ascertaining the quantum of compensation for loss of earnings and loss of earning capacity is too low. The petitioner was a two wheeler mechanic. Even though no better evidence has been produced to support that assertion, the FIR itself shows that he was a skilled motor/two wheeler mechanic. We agree with the learned counsel for the appellant that reasonable inferences can be drawn from the proved facts by the Tribunal, even in the absence of clinching documentary evidence to support the contention. The presumption of prudence permitted under the 2nd Schedule that even a non-earning person can be deemed to have a notional income of Rs.1,250/- per mensem must be borne in mind. We are satisfied, in these circumstances, that, at any rate, the appellate can be deemed to have an income not less than Rs.2,000/- per mensm. Consequently, for loss of earnings and reduction in earning capacity, the appellant will be entitled for higher amount. M.A.C.A. No.1166 of 2007-G -: 4 :- 4. The appellant was an inpatient for a period of 40 days. He had suffered multiple fractures as indicated above. We are satisfied that there is merit in the contention that the award of only an amount of Rs.9,000/- as compensation for pain and suffering is too low. We are satisfied that an amount of Rs.12,500/- can be fixed as compensation under the head of pain and suffering. For inpatient treatment for a period of 40 days, only a total amount of Rs.4,000/- has been awarded under the head of extra nourishment and wages to attendants. We are satisfied that an amount at the rate of Rs.200/- per day should have been awarded under this head. 5. For loss of amenities and happiness in life, only an amount of Rs.4,000/- has been awarded Though we are not persuaded to interfere with the finding that 5% reduction in earning capacity must have resulted consequent to the accident, we are satisfied that the appellant's claim for compensation for loss of amenities also deserves to be considered. The physical disability suffered by a victim has two fold reflections on his life. It reduces the earning capacity. It also impairs the quality of enjoyment of life which the appellant can aspire to lead thereafter. Considering the totality of circumstances, we are satisfied that for the disability suffered by the appellant, the M.A.C.A. No.1166 of 2007-G -: 5 :- appellant is entitled for an amount of Rs.10,000/- as compensation for loss of amenities. 6. We are not satisfied that the amount awarded under any other head deserves modification. 7. The above discussions lead us to the conclusion that the appellant is entitled to the following further amounts as compensation in addition to the amounts already awarded by the Tribunal: 1. Loss of earnings (2000 x 4 minus Rs.6,000/-) - Rs.2,000/- 2. Extra nourishment and wages to attendants (40 x 200 minus Rs.4,000/-) - Rs.4,000/- 3. Pain and suffering (Rs.12,500/- minus Rs.9,000/- - Rs.3,500/- 4. Loss of amenities and happiness in life (Rs.10,000/- minus Rs.4,000/-) - Rs.6,000/- 5. Compensation for earning capacity (2000 x 12 x 17 x 15/100 Rs.61,200/- minus Rs.45,900/-) - Rs.15,300 ---------------- Total - Rs.30,800/- ======= We further direct that the entire amount of compensation shall carry interest at the rate of 7.5% per annum from the date of the M.A.C.A. No.1166 of 2007-G -: 6 :- petition to the date of payment. 8. This appeal is allowed in part to the above extent. Sd/- R. BASANT (Judge) Sd/- C.T. RAVIKUMAR (Judge) Nan/ //true copy// P.S. to Judge