IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE R.BASANT & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE C.T.RAVIKUMAR MONDAY, THE 16TH FEBRUARY 2009 / 27TH MAGHA 1930 MACA.No. 1162 of 2008() ----------------------- OPMV.733/2006 of MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS TRIBUNAL, KOLLAM .................... APPELLANT(S)/PETITIONERS: -------------- 1. SREEKUMAR, S/O.GOPALAKRISHNA PILAI PALLADICKAL PUTHEN VEEDU NEENDAKARA PO., NEENDAKARA VILLAGE 2. RAJESH, S/O.GOPALAKRISHNA PILLAI DO.DO. (BROTHER OF 1ST APPELLANT) BY ADVS. SRI.K.RAVEENDRAN SRI.M.S. ANILKUMAR RESPONDENT(S)/RESPONDENTS: --------------- 1. ABDUL MANAF, S/O.ABDUL KHADER KUNJU, THETIKUZHIYIL, KARTHIKAPPALY KAYAMKULAM, ALAPPUZHA DISTRICT. 2. SHAJAHAN, S/O.KHADIRKUTTY, ALINTE PADINJATTETHIL, VENGA PO., SASTHAMCOTTA. 3. THE MANAGER, NEW INDIA ASSURANCE CO.LTD LIC BUILDING, CHINNAKKADA , KOLLAM 4. THE MANAGER, NATIONAL INSURANCE CO.LTD., PARAMESWARAN PILLAI BHAVAN, HOSPITAL ROAD, KOLLAM ADVS. SRI.LAL GEORGE FOR R4 SRI.P.JAYASANKAR FOR R3 THIS MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS APPEAL HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 16/02/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: R. BASANT & C.T. RAVIKUMAR, JJ. --------------------------------------------------------- M.A.C.A. NO.1162 OF 2008 --------------------------------------------------------- Dated this the 16th day of February, 2009 JUDGMENT Basant, J. The first claimant before the Tribunal is the first appellant before us. He was unconscious after the accident and at the time of filing of the petition. He came before the Tribunal assisted by his brother, the second claimant to state his claim. An amount of Rs.18,00,000/- was claimed by way of compensation for the personal injuries suffered by the first claimant in the motor accident that reduced him to a vegetable existence after the accident. The Tribunal taking all the relevant circumstances into account came to the conclusion that the first claimant/ first appellant is entitled for an amount of Rs.10,67.100/- by way of compensation. The heads under which the amounts are awarded are given in detail in paragraph 9 of the impugned award. 2. Learned counsel for the appellants contends that the amount awarded is not just, fair and reasonable compensation. Considering the nature of the injuries suffered, the disability which the first claimant continues to suffer and the agony which is continuing to endure even now and shall have to endure in future, the total amount of compensation is not sufficient, it is urged. Called upon to explain the specific grounds of M.A.C.A. NO.1162/2008 2 challenge which the appellants want to raise, learned counsel for the appellants submits that at any rate the compensation awarded for continuing permanent disability at Rs.3,45,600/- is totally insufficient. The Tribunal was unrealistic in reckoning the multiplicand at Rs.2,000/- per mensem. Considering the qualification of the first appellant and the fact that he was employed abroad at the relevant time earning an income of Rs.10,000/- per month, at least a reasonable amount should have been accepted by the Tribunal and that acceptance of Rs.2,000/- alone as the monthly income is totally unjustifiable, contends counsel. Reliance was placed on Ext.A14 copy of S.S.L.C. Book, Ext.A15 copy of the certificate of V.H.S.S., Provisional National Trade Certificate (Ext.A17), Certificate of Competency issued by K.S.E.L.B. (Ext.A18) and the Passport (Ext.A19) to contend that the first appellant was well employed and that he must easily be able to secure good employment anywhere, abroad or in India, and earn substantial income much above Rs.2,000/- reckoned by the Tribunal. 3. Having considered all the relevant circumstances, we are persuaded to agree that the multiplicand reckoned by the Tribunal at Rs.2,000/- is not sufficient, adequate and reasonable and in the given circumstances, it would be safe to reckon the multiplicand at Rs.3,000/- per mensem. Consequently, under the head compensation for continuing M.A.C.A. NO.1162/2008 3 permanent disability, that is, reduction in earning capacity, the first appellant will be entitled to a further amount of Rs.1,72,800/- (3000 x 12 x 18 x 80/100 minus 2000 x 12 x18 x 80/100). Even though challenge was raised against the amounts awarded under the other heads, we are not persuaded to agree that the amounts awarded under the other heads warrant any interference. We take note of the fact that an amount of Rs.50,000/- has been awarded as compensation for pain and suffering and Rs.50,000/- towards loss of future amenities in life. The medical expenses incurred has also been compensated reasonably against the bills produced. Bystander expenses already incurred and to be incurred in future have also been taken into account while awarding compensation. 4. The above discussions lead us to conclude that the first appellant is entitled to a further amount of Rs.1,72,800/- as compensation. That amount also shall carry interest at the rate of 7.5% per annum as already ordered by the Tribunal from the date of the petition. The appeal is allowed in part to the above extent. (R. BASANT) JUDGE (C.T. RAVIKUMAR) JUDGE sp/ M.A.C.A. NO.1162/2008 4 R. BASANT & & C.T. RAVIKUMAR, JJ. M.A.C.A. NO.1162/2008 JUDGMENT 16th February, 2009