IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE A.K.BASHEER & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.Q.BARKATH ALI MONDAY, THE 26TH JULY 2010 / 4TH SRAVANA 1932 MACA.No. 2053 of 2005() ----------------------- OPMV.246/2001 of MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS TRIBUNAL, KOTTAYAM .................... APPELLANT(S): APPELLANT/PETITIONER ---------------------------------- SUDHEER.S, S/O.SUMATHI.K, SANKARAMANGALAM, VAZHAPPALLY WEST.P.O, CHANGANACHERRY. BY ADV. SRI.K.A.HASHIM RESPONDENT(S): RESPONDENTS --------------- 1. M.PONNAMBALAM, S/O.MUTHUSWAMY GOUNDER, 1013-A, SECTOR 29, FARIDABAD. 2. R.RAMESH, S/O.RAJARAM, 13 KAMACHIPURAM, THURAIYUR, T.K.TRICHY DISTRICT. 3. THE NEW INDIA ASSURANCE CO. LTD., NAMAKKAL DIVISION, REPRESENTED BY ITS DIVISIONAL MANAGER, KOTTAYAM. ADV. SRI.A.C.DEVY FOR R3 THIS MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS APPEAL HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 26/07/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: A.K.BASHEER & P.Q.BARKATH ALI, JJ. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - M.A.C.A.No.2053 OF 2005 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Dated this the 26th day of July, 2010 JUDGMENT Barkath Ali, J. Appellant, a taxi driver aged 32, sustained the following injuries in a motor accident that occurred on April 11, 2000 at about 12 0' clock noon near Salem in Tamil Nadu while the taxi car driven by him collided head on with a tanker lorry bearing Reg.No.HNU 7436 driven by the second respondent ; Closed fracture lower one-third humerus right with radial nerve palsy, isolated closed fracture ulna right lower one-third, fracture lower end of radius left hand fracture ulna middle third both bone fracture right leg communited with punctured wound, fracture both bone left leg upper one-third, communited, subtrochantric type I open femur, contusion chest. 2. Claiming a compensation of Rs. 7,35,000/-, he filed O.P. (MV)No.246/2001 before the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Kottayam alleging negligence against the second respondent. 3. Respondents 1 and 2, the owner and the driver of the MACA.No.2053/2005 2 offending lorry remained absent before the Tribunal. The third respondent, the insurer of the offending lorry admitted the policy, but attributed negligence on the part of the claimant. 4. Pws 1 to 3 were examined and Exts.A1 to A13 were marked on the side of the claimant. No evidence was adduced on the side of the contesting third respondent. On an appreciation of evidence, the Tribunal awarded a compensation of Rs. 2,33,700/- with interest @ 6% per annum from the date of petition till realisation and proportionate cost. The claimant has 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 second respondent 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 Tribunal awarded a total compensation of MACA.No.2053/2005 3 Rs.2,33,700/-. The break up of the compensation awarded is as under : Pain and suffering - Rs. 35,000/- Loss of earning - Rs. 13,500/- Damage to clothing - Rs. 300/- Transport to hospital - Rs. 6,000/- Treatment expenses - Rs. 19,400/- Bystander expenses - Rs. 10,000/- Extra nourishment - Rs. 3,000/- Disability - Rs. 1,21,500/- Loss of amenities - Rs. 25,000/- 8. Counsel for the claimant sought enhancement of compensation for the disability caused. 9. The Tribunal took the monthly income of the claimant as Rs.2,250/- and took the percentage of disability as 25% and adopted a multiplier of 18 and awarded Rs. 1,21,500/- for the disability caused. As the claimant is a Taxi driver, we feel that his monthly income can be reasonably fixed at Rs. 3,000/-. In Ext.A5, PW3, the doctor has certified that the claimant has a disability of 42%. But the nature of disability is not mentioned therein. Therefore, the Tribunal is perfectly justified in taking his percentage of disability as 25%. The multiplier adopted by the Tribunal as 18 is not seriously challenged. Thus calculated for the disability caused, the claimant is entitled to a MACA.No.2053/2005 4 compensation of Rs.1,62,000/- ( 25% x 3000 x 12 x 18). Thus on this count, the claimant is entitled to an additional compensation of Rs. 40,500/-. 10. The Tribunal awarded Rs. 13,500/- for loss of earnings for six months @ Rs. 2,250/- per month. The nature of the injury sustained by the claimant shows that he must have been disabled for one year. We have fixed the monthly income of the Tribunal as Rs. 3,000/-. Therefore, towards loss of earnings for one year, the claimant is entitled to a compensation of Rs. 36,000/-. Thus on this count, the claimant is entitled to an additional compensation of Rs. 22,500/-. As regards the compensation awarded under other heads, we find the same to be reasonable and therefore are not disturbing the same. 11. There is another aspect in this case. 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 realisation for the compensation already awarded and also for the enhanced compensation. MACA.No.2053/2005 5 12. In the result, the claimant is entitled to an additional compensation of Rs. 63,000/-. The claimant is entitled to interest @ 7.5% per annum from the date of petition till realisation for the compensation already awarded and also for the enhanced compensation. He is also entitled to proportionate cost. The third respondent being the insurer of the offending vehicle shall deposit the amount before the Tribunal within two months from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment. 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 sv. MACA.No.2053/2005 6 MACA.No.2053/2005 7