IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE R.BASANT & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE C.T.RAVIKUMAR FRIDAY, THE 13TH MARCH 2009 / 22ND PHALGUNA 1930 MACA.No. 559 of 2009() ---------------------- OPMV.787/2005 of ADDITIONAL MOTOR ACCIDENTS CLAIMS TRIBUNAL, KOTTAYAM .................... APPELLANT(S): PETITIONER ------------------------ SUBIN.P.KOSHY, CHANGAZHASSERIMANNIL, KATTODU KARA, MANJADI POST, THIRUVALLA. BY ADVSSRI.MATHEW JOHN (K) SRI.AJEESH K.SASI RESPONDENT(S): RESPONDENTS -------------------------- 1. AZEEZ, S/O.ABU, KIZHAKKEPUTHUPARAMPIL HOUSE, MALAKUNNAM POST, ITHITHANAM,CHANGANACHERRY. 2. SUNI KURIAKOSE, OINAPURATHU, KURISUMMOODU, CHANGANACHERRY. 3. THE BRANCH MANAGER,THE ORIENTAL INSURANCE CO.LTD, PERUNNA, CHANGANACHERRY. BY // THIS MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS APPEAL HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 13/03/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: R. BASANT & C.T. RAVIKUMAR, JJ. --------------------------------------------------------- M.A.C.A. NO.559 OF 2009 --------------------------------------------------------- Dated this the 13th day of March, 2009 JUDGMENT Basant, J. The claimant before the Tribunal is the appellant before us. He claimed a total amount of Rs.7,00,000/- as compensation for personal injuries suffered by him in an accident which occurred on 28.10.2004. He was an Engineering student aged 21 years. Closed fracture shaft of right femur is the injury suffered by him. He was an inpatient for a period of 24 days. No oral evidence was adduced. Exts.A1 to A8 were marked before the Tribunal. 2. The Tribunal, on an anxious consideration of all the relevant inputs, proceeded to pass the impugned award directing payment of an amount of Rs.1,71,000/- along with interest at the rate of 7.5% per annum as per the details shown below: i. Pain and suffering :Rs. 25,000/- ii. Medical expenses (against bills produced) :Rs. 91,000/- M.A.C.A. NO.559/2009 2 iii. Transport to hospital :Rs. 1,500/- iv. Extra nourishment :Rs. 500/- v. Damage to clothing :Rs. 1,000/- vi. Bystander expenses :Rs. 2,000/- vii. Loss of amenities :Rs. 20,000/- vii. Reduction in earning capacity(2000x12x16x8/100) : =Rs.30,720/- rounded off to :Rs. 30,000/- ----------------- Total :Rs.1,71,000/- ----------------- 3. The appellant claims to be aggrieved by the impugned award. Called upon to explain the nature of the challenge which the appellant wants to mount against the impugned award, counsel for the appellant, first of all, contends that the multiplicand reckoned - Rs.2,000/- per mensem, is too inadequate. He further contends that though Ext.A7 certificate shows the percentage of disability as 10%, only 8% has been reckoned as reduction in earning capacity while adopting the multiplier - multiplicand method. On both these grounds, the appellant assails the quantum of compensation awarded for loss of reduction in earning capacity. Counsel further submits that Rs.2,000/- awarded towards bystander expanses is too inadequate. Though the period of hospitalisation is only 24 days, the M.A.C.A. NO.559/2009 3 appellant had to be treated as an outpatient and in these circumstances, the amount awarded is insufficient, contends counsel. Counsel has a further contention that the amounts awarded under the heads pain and suffering (Rs.25,000/-) and loss of amenities (Rs.20,000/-) are inadequate. He raises a further objection that no amount was specifically awarded for future treatment. 4. We have considered all the relevant circumstances. The appellant had admittedly not started earning. Rs.2,000/- has been reckoned as the multiplicand. In the circumstances, we do not find any reason to interfere with the multiplicand reckoned by the Tribunal considering the fact that the appellant had not started earning and that capitalised payment is being made for future loss. 5. The percentage of disability is certified to be 10%. We have been taken through the disability certificate. We will assume that the said percentage of disability can be accepted safely. But even then we find that such physical disability will not result in reduction in earning capacity exceeding 8%, considering the nature of the qualification and the probable future employment of the appellant. We are not, in these circumstances, satisfied that the amount awarded under the head reduction in earning M.A.C.A. NO.559/2009 4 capacity calls for any interference. 6. K. nail removal is the future treatment that is required. The entire expenses, as per the bills produced, has been awarded. An amount of Rs.25,000/- has been awarded for pain and suffering and an amount of Rs.20,000/- has been awarded for loss of amenities. We are, therefore, satisfied that the amount of Rs.1,71,000/- awarded as total compensation cannot be held to be not fair, reasonable or just. We are, in these circumstances, persuaded to conclude that there is no scope for appellate interference. 7. In the circumstances, this appeal is dismissed. (R. BASANT) JUDGE (C.T. RAVIKUMAR) JUDGE sp/ M.A.C.A. NO.559/2009 5 R. BASANT & C.T. RAVIKUMAR, JJ. M.A.C.A. NO.559/2009 JUDGMENT 13th March, 2009 M.A.C.A. NO.559/2009 6