IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE A.K.BASHEER & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.Q.BARKATH ALI FRIDAY, THE 30TH JULY 2010 / 8TH SRAVANA 1932 MACA.No. 1423 of 2005(B) ----------------------- OPMV.1702/2000 of MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS TRIBUNAL, MUVATTUPUZHA .................... APPELLANT(S): PETITIONER ------------------------ JOBBY GEORGE, S/O.GEORGE, AGED 24 YEARS, MULLAPPIL HOUSE, KARIMKUNNAM.P.O., THODUPUZHA. BY ADV. SRI.K.RAMACHANDRAN SRI.S.SREEDEV RESPONDENT(S): RESPONDENTS --------------- 1. DR. CIVY V.PULAYATH, SMILE DENTAL CARE, THIRUVANKULAM, NEAR PUBLIC LIBRARY. 2. THE ORIENTAL INSURANCE COMPANY LTD., DIVISIONAL OFFICE, MUVATTUPUZHA, ADV. SRI.VPK.PANICKER FOR R2 THIS MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS APPEAL HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 30/07/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: A.K. BASHEER & P.Q. BARKATH ALI, JJ. ------------------------------------------------------ M.A.C.A. 1423 of 2005 ------------------------------------------------------ Dated: JULY 30, 2010 JUDGMENT Barkath Ali, J. The appellant is the claimant in OP(MV) 1702/2000 on the file of the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Muvattupuzha. He sustained the following injuries when the car bearing registration No.KL-7/AA 6767 in which he was travelling hit against an electric post on the side of the road and capsized on Kurikunnam - Piravathanam road on November 19, 2000 at about 8.30 p.m.: “Lacerated wound on the left frontal region extending to the mid line. Multiple lacerations over the face. Lacerated wound over the left wrist 8x2 cm. Lacerated wound left hand extending from the wrist to the root of the finger. Claiming a compensation of Rs.3 lakhs the claimant filed the OP before the Tribunal under Sec.166 of the Motor Vehicles Act alleging negligence against the 1st respondent, who was the owner-cum- driver of the offending vehicle. 2. Respondent No.1 in his written statement admitted the M.A.C.A. 1423 of 2005 2 accident, but denied the liability. The 2nd respondent, insurer of the offending vehicle, filed a written statement admitting the policy. 3. This OP was jointly tried along with another OP filed by another injured person in the accident and a common award was passed. PWs.1 and 2 were examined and Exts.A1 to A20 were marked on the side of the claimant before the Tribunal. Ext.B1 was marked on the side of the respondents. On an appreciation of evidence the Tribunal found that the accident occurred due to the negligence of the 1st respondent and awarded a total compensation of Rs.64000/- with interest @ 6% per annum from the date of petition till realisation. The claimant has now come up in appeal challenging the quantum of compensation awarded by the Tribunal. 4. Heard the counsel for the appellant/claimant and the counsel for the Insurance Company. 5. The accident is not disputed. The finding of the Tribunal that the accident occurred due to the negligence on the part of the 1st respondent is not challenged in this appeal. Therefore the only question which arises for consideration is whether the claimant is entitled to any enhanced compensation. 6. The break up of the compensation amount awarded is as under: M.A.C.A. 1423 of 2005 3 loss of earning Rs.6000/- transportation 2500/- damage to clothing 500/- extra nourishment 1000/- treatment expenses 39000/- attendant's expenses 1000/- pain and suffering 8000/- loss of amenities 6000/- 7. Counsel for the claimant sought compensation for the disability caused and enhancement of the compensation for the pain and suffering endured by the claimant. No compensation was awarded by the Tribunal for the disability caused to the claimant. The claimant suffered a permanent disability of 10% as seen from Ext.A12 certificate issued from the hospital. Ext.A12 shows that “FDS tendon to little finger was severed and there was partial injury to FDS of middle finger and partial injury to median nerve and that the injured tendons were repaired”. Therefore we feel that the percentage of disability suffered by the claimant can be taken as 5%. The Tribunal took the monthly income of the claimant as Rs.1500/-. According to the claimant he was a dental mechanic in A.J.Dental Lab, Koothattukulam, earning Rs.4000/- per month. Ext.A16 is the copy of registration as dental mechanic issued by Tamil Nadu Dental Council. M.A.C.A. 1423 of 2005 4 Ext.A17 shows that the claimant has undergone two year dental mechanic course at Sankarachariyar Dental College, Salem. Ext.A18 is the salary certificate. Taking into consideration all these aspects, we feel that his monthly income can be reasonably fixed at Rs.3000/-. A multiplier of 17 would be reasonable in this case as he was aged 24 at the time of the accident. Thus calculated, for the disability caused the claimant is entitled to a compensation of Rs.30600/- (5% of 1500 x 12 x 17). 8. The Tribunal awarded Rs.8000/- as the compensation for the pain and suffering endured by the claimant which appears to be very low. Taking into consideration the nature of the injuries sustained, we feel that a compensation of Rs.10,000/- would be reasonable on this count. As regards the compensation awarded under other heads, we find the same to be reasonable and therefore we are not disturbing the same. 9. Thus the claimant is entitled to an additional compensation of Rs.32,600/-. The Tribunal awarded interest only at the rate of 6% per annum, which appears to be very low. He is entitled to interest @ 7.5% per annum for the compensation already awarded and for the enhanced compensation from the date of petition till realisation and proportionate cost. The 2nd respondent being the insurer of the M.A.C.A. 1423 of 2005 5 offending vehicle shall deposit the amount before the Tribunal within two months from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment. The award of the Tribunal is modified to the above extent. The appeal is disposed of as found above. A.K. BASHEER, JUDGE P.Q. BARKATH ALI, JUDGE mt/-