IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE M.N.KRISHNAN WEDNESDAY, THE 25TH JUNE 2008 / 4TH ASHADHA 1930 MACA.No. 2145 of 2006() ----------------------- OPMV.15/2004 of MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS TRIBUNAL, KASARAGOD .................... APPELLANT/3RD & 5TH RESPONDENT: ---------------------------------------------------------- THE ORIENTAL INSURANCE COMPANY LTD., KASARAGOD, NOW REPRESENTED BY ITS ASSISTANT MANAGER, REGIONAL OFFICE, METRO PALACE, KOCHI-18. BY ADV. SRI.MATHEWS JACOB (SR.) SRI.P.JACOB MATHEW RESPONDENT: PETITIONER: -------------------------------------------- RATHNAKARAN, S/O. KRISHNAN MANIYANI, KAKKOTTAMMA HOUSE, P.O.MUNNAD, BEDAKAM, KASARAGOD DISTRICT. BY THIS MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS APPEAL HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 25/06/2008,THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: Kss ORDER ON I.A.NO.2385/2006 IN M.A.C.A.NO.2145/2006 DISMISSED 25/06/2008 SD/- M.N.KRISHNAN, JUDGE /TRUE COPY/ P.A.TO JUDGE Kss M.N. KRISHNAN, J. = = = = = = = = = = = = = = M.A.C.A. NO. 2145 OF 2006 = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = Dated this the 25th day of June, 2008. J U D G M E N T This appeal is preferred against the award of the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Kasaragod in O.P.(MV)15/04. It is an application filed under Section 163-A of the M.V. Act for injuries sustained in a road accident on 10.8.03. It was contended that the income per month is Rs.6,000/-. But the Tribunal found it at Rs.1,500/- and proceeded to decide the compensation. The Tribunal awarded a total compensation of Rs.78,200/- and it is against the maintainability of the petition as such plus the claim that is challenged before this Court. 2. So far as the maintainability of the petition is concerned, the learned counsel for the insurance company would contend that since the income claimed is Rs.6,000/- and as per the decision of the Apex Court any claim beyond Rs.36,000/- cannot be moved under Section 163-A, the M.A.C.A. 2145 OF 2006 -:2:- claim petition which is under Section 163-A, is not liable to be entertained. The Division Bench of this Court in the decision reported in United India Insurance Co. Ltd. v. Rukiya (2007 ACJ 698) had the opportunity to consider this question. 3. Here the question is that the claimant raised a plea of income of Rs.6,000/- but the Tribunal found it as Rs.1,500/-. When it is so, whether a petition will lie is the question. In the case before the Division Bench it was a case relating to death where the claim was on the basis of the income of Rs.10,000/- alleged to be earned by the husband but the Tribunal on facts found it at Rs.3,000/-. This Court held that the said claim is maintainable. In paragraph 2 of the judgment it is stated as follows. First contention is that application under Section 163-A will not lie as the deceased was drawing more than Rs.40,000/- in a year. The Apex Court in Koppula Venkat Rao v. State of A.P. 2004 (2) M.A.C.A. 2145 OF 2006 -:3:- KLT (SC) SN 19 held that remedies under Section 163-A are available only if the annual income of the accident victim is below Rs.40,000/- and others can file claim petition only Section 166. But, in this case the Tribunal has found that his monthly income was only Rs.3,000/-. If that is so, application filed by legal representatives cannot be rejected on that ground as yearly income of the deceased was only Rs.36,000/-. Applying the principles laid down in the said decision here, since the finding of the Tribunal is that the annual income is Rs.18,000/-, then a claim is maintainable under Section 163-A. Therefore the said contention of the insurance company cannot be entertained. Learned counsel appearing for the insurance company had invited my attention to the various heads under which compensation has been awarded which cannot be done under Section 163-A of the M.V. Act. Following the schedule II of the Act, a person who has sustained disability is envisaged therein, in a case of M.A.C.A. 2145 OF 2006 -:4:- grievous injury is entitled to a maximum compensation of Rs.5,000/- for pain and sufferings. To the medical expenses supported by vouchers and bills not exceeding Rs.15,000/- and also the disability compensation by applying the multiplier. But in this case, the Tribunal has awarded Rs.500/- towards transport to hospital, Rs.200/- towards damage to clothing, Rs.1,400/- towards bystanders expenses, Rs.24,865/- towards medical bills and Rs.10,000/- towards compensation for pain and sufferings. As per the schedule, amounts cannot be awarded for transportation, damage to clothing, bystanders expenses etc. Similarly, one time medical expenses shall be only Rs.15,000/- and compensation for pain and sufferings for grievous injuries can be only Rs.5,000/-. When these figures are taken in to account it will come to Rs.16,965/-. That part of the amount is not admissible. Therefore deducting Rs.16,965/- from Rs.78,200/- the entitlement will be Rs.61,235/-. M.A.C.A. 2145 OF 2006 -:5:- In the result a modified award is passed and the claimant is awarded a compensation of Rs.61,235/- with 9% interest on the said sum from the date of petition till 31.12.04 and thereafter at the rate of 6% per annum till realisation with proportionate costs as ordered by the Tribunal. The appellant herein shall deposit the amount within a period of sixty days from the date of receipt of a copy of the judgment. The MACA is disposed of accordingly. M.N. KRISHNAN, JUDGE. ul/-