IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.M.JOSEPH & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE M.L.JOSEPH FRANCIS MONDAY, THE 27TH JULY 2009 / 5TH SRAVANA 1931 MACA.No. 1903 of 2005(D) ---------------------------------- OPMV.878/2001 of MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS TRIBUNAL, MANJERI .................... APPELLANT(S): PETITIONER -------------------------------------------- A.V.ABBAS, S/O.SOOPYKUTTY HAJI, AZHUVAKAPPIL HOUSE, PANAKKAD AMSOM, PATTARKADAVU P.O., MALAPPURAM DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI. BABU S. NAIR RESPONDENT(S): 3RD RESPONDENT ----------------------------- THE NEW INDIA ASSURANCE CO LTD., BRANCH OFFICE, 28 R.G. STREET, COIMBATORE. ADV. SRI.P.G.GANAPPAN THIS MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS APPEAL HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 27/07/2009, THE COURT ON 27/07/2009 DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: K.M. JOSEPH & M. L. JOSEPH FRANCIS, JJ. `````````````````````````````````````````````` M.A.C.A. NO: 1903 OF 2005 ```````````````````````````````````````````````` Dated this the 27th Day of July, 2009. JUDGMENT K. M. Joseph J. The appellant is the claimant in a petition filed under Section 166 of the Motor Vehicle Act. As against the claim for 1,50,000/- the Tribunal has awarded only Rs.18,200/- , the break up details of which are as follows: Transport to Hospital : 500.00 Extra noursihment and bystanders expenses : 600.00 Pain and suffering : 9,000.00 Disability : 8,100.00 ---------------- Total : 18,200.00 = = = = = = = = 2. Heard the learned counsel for the appellant and the learned counsel for the third respondent/Insurance Company. 3. Learned counsel for the appellant would contend that the income taken as Rs.1,500/- is on the lower side. He further contended no amount was awarded towards loss of amenity and damage of M.A.C.A . NO: 1903 OF 2005 :2: clothing. He further contended that the appellant had been admitted and treated as result of injuries. There after, he was under treatment and that is proved by Ext. A5 document. It is pointed out that the amount awarded towards pain and suffering is only Rs.9,000/- The amount awarded towards disability is only Rs.8,100/-. 4. Learned counsel for the Insurance Company supported the award. 5. The first question to be considered is what is the income. The case of the appellant is that the appellant is driver of an autorikshaw and the accident was happened when he was driving the autorikshaw. He was examined as PW1. According to him, he was getting an income of Rs.5,000/- per month. The accident took place in the year 2000. We are of the view that the income can be safely fixed as Rs.2,000/ per month. Applying disability of 3%, which was certified by Medical Board by Ext.X1, and taking the multiplier as 14 going by the age of the appellant, namely 45 years, in the light of the judgment in Sarla Verma & Others Vs. Delhi Transport Corpn. and another (2009 ACJ 1298), we find the appellant is entitled to Rs.10,080/-, that is Rs.1,980/- more. M.A.C.A . NO: 1903 OF 2005 :3: 6. We find that the appellant is justified in demanding compensation under the head of loss of amenity, damage to clothing and also the treatment expenses subsequently undergone as evidence by Ext.A7. We award a consolidated sum of Rs.10,000/- more. The appellant was awarded Rs.9,000/- towards pain and suffering. We also bear in mind that apart from Rs.18,200/- awarded by the Tribunal, the appellant should be reimbursed a sum of Rs.24,677/- by way of medical expenses, as noted by the Tribunal. Accordingly the appeal is allowed and the appellant is allowed to realise a sum of Rs.12,000/- with interest at the rate of 7.5% from the date of petition till the date of realisation from the respondents. K. M. JOSEPH, JUDGE M. L. JOSEPH FRANCIS, JUDGE dl/