IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE R.BASANT & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE C.T.RAVIKUMAR WEDNESDAY, THE 11TH MARCH 2009 / 20TH PHALGUNA 1930 MACA.No. 587 of 2007() ---------------------- APPELLANT/PETITIONER: --------------------------- K.M.PRASANNA KUMAR, S/O. MADHAVAN PILLAI, KAVARATHU HOUSE, ALUMKADAVU DESOM, VARUNOOR KULANGARA. BY ADV. SRI.V.BINOY RAM RESPONDENTS/RESPONDENTS: ----------------------------------- 1. T.P.RAMAKRISHNAN (DRIVER), S/O. PARAN, THOOVATHU (A), THOOPRAN HOUSE, KUTTICHIRA VILLAGE, KUNDUKUZHYPPADAM DESOM, CHALAKUDY, THRISSUR DISTRICT. 2. DIVISIONAL FOREST OFFICER, (OWNER), DIVISIONAL FOREST OFFICE, VAZHACHAL DIVISION, CHALAKUDY. 3. THE BRANCH MANAGER, UNITED INDIA INSURANCE CO. LTD., BRANCH OFFICE, SREEKUMAR BUILDINGS, CHALAKUDY. R3 BY ADV. SRI.P.MURALEEDHARAN THIS MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS APPEAL HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 11/03/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: R. BASANT & C.T. RAVIKUMAR, JJ. ----------------------------------------------- M.A.C.A No. 587 OF 2007 ----------------------------------------------- Dated this the 11th day of March, 2009 JUDGMENT BASANT, J Claimant before the Tribunal is the appellant before us. He had claimed compensation for personal injuries suffered in a motor accident which occurred on 02.10.2000. He claimed an amount of Rs.3 lakhs as compensation. He was a Forester employed by the Forest Department of the Government of Kerala. His monthly income was claimed to be Rs.7,583/-. He had suffered fracture of the left femur, fracture on both lower 1/3 leg and laceration on left leg lower 1/3. He was an in-patient for a period of 37 days. He had suffered physical disability to the tune of 19% as a result of the accident. 2. Before the Tribunal the claimant examined himself as PW1 and the Doctor who issued the disability certificate, Ext.A10, as PW2. Exts.A1 to A13 were marked. The Tribunal on an anxious consideration of all the relevant inputs proceeded to award an amount of Rs.49,740/- as compensation as per the details shown below: MACA:587/07 -:2:- 1. Cost of extra nourishment and wages to attendants :Rs. 3,700/- 2. Medical expenses :Rs.13,460/- 3. Transportation charges :Rs. 300/- 4. Pain and suffering :Rs.10,000/- 5. Loss of amenities and happiness in life :Rs. 5,000/- 6. Permanent disability :Rs.17,280/- (1,500x12x8x12/100) ----------------- Total :Rs.49,740/- ========== 3. The said amount was directed to be paid along with interest at the rate of 6% per annum from the date of filing of the petition. 4. Appellant claims to be aggrieved by the impugned order. Called upon to explain the nature of challenge which the appellant wants to mount against the impugned award, learned counsel for the appellant assails the impugned order on various grounds. First of all it is contended that, the interest has been awarded only at the rate of 6% per annum. Relying on precedents it is contended that, interest must have been awarded at least at the rate of 7.5% per annum. We agree with the learned counsel for the appellant. 5. It is contended that no compensation has been awarded MACA:587/07 -:3:- for loss of earning/leave. The certificate produced shows that the appellant who was travelling in the vehicle belonging to his Department (Forest Department) at the time of the accident had been granted special disability leave for a period of four months. In these circumstances it cannot be held that there was either loss of leave or loss of earning when he was under treatment. The Tribunal, we are satisfied, was justified in not granting any amount under that head. 6. The learned counsel for the appellant contends that though the disability certificate, Ext.A10, issued by PW2 shows that a disability of 19%, the Tribunal has reckoned only 12% as the reduction in earning capacity. The appellant was employed as a Forester. Till such time he retires on superannuation from service, he is unlikely to suffer any loss of earnings or monetary loss on the ground of loss of earning capacity. The Tribunal in these circumstances took into account the probable reduction in earning capacity after the appellant retires on superannuation from his employment with the Forest Department. Considering the probable nature of the work which the appellant, a Forester, might MACA:587/07 -:4:- undertake after the period of superannuation and considering the nature of the disability suffered, we are satisfied that the Tribunal did not commit any error in reckoning the reduction in earning capacity at 12%. That course adopted by of the Tribunal does not, according to us, warrant interference. 6. Learned counsel for the appellant contends that in any view of the matter reckoning of the multiplicand at Rs.1,500/- per month for the post-superannuation period of employment is perversely and painfully low. Considering the status of the appellant as a Forester of the Department, it must be easy for the Tribunal to reckon his post-superannuation earning per mensem at Rs.2,500/- per month at least. We agree with the learned counsel and accept that Rs.2,500/- can be reckoned as the multiplicand to be taken into consideration for ascertaining the probable loss on account of reduction in earning capacity. The appellant will hence be entitled for a higher amount for reduction in earning capacity consequent to disability suffered. 7. The counsel contends that for loss of amenities/enjoyment of life only an amount of Rs.5,000/- has been awarded which MACA:587/07 -:5:- ignores the reality of the situation. 19% physical disability is proved by Ext.A10 and the oral evidence of PW2 shows that the appellant will have to endure that disability for the rest of his life. He was aged 54 years at the date of the accident. We are satisfied in the circumstances of the case that Rs.15,000/- can be fixed as the compensation payable under the head of loss of amenities. The appellant will consequently be entitled to a further amount of Rs.10,000/- under that head. 8. The appellant had suffered serious injuries including fracture of the left femur and fracture on both bones (lower 1/3 leg) and laceration on left leg lower 1/3. He continued treatment as an in-patient for a period of 37 days. Procedures had to be undergone while he was under treatment. Only an amount of Rs.10,000/- has been awarded under pain and suffering. We are satisfied that an amount of Rs.15,000/- can safely be fixed as quantum of compensation for pain and suffering. 9. The above discussions lead us to the conclusion that the appellant is entitled for the following further amounts as compensation in addition to the amounts already awarded by the MACA:587/07 -:6:- Tribunal. 1. Loss of amenities(15,000 minus 5,000) :Rs.10,000/ 2. Pain and suffering(15,000 minus 10,000) :Rs. 5,000/- 3. Reduction in earning capacity consequent to permanent disability (2,500x12x8x12/100 = 28,800 minus 17,280) :Rs.11,520/- ---------------- Total :Rs.26,520/- ========== 10. We further direct that interest be paid on the entire amounts of compensation at the rate of 7.5% per annum from the date of the petition. 11. This appeal is accordingly allowed in part to the above extent. R. BASANT, JUDGE C.T. RAVIKUMAR, JUDGE ttb MACA:587/07 -:7:- MACA:587/07 -:8:-