IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE R.BASANT & THE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE M.C.HARI RANI THURSDAY, THE 13TH OCTOBER 2011 / 21ST ASWINA 1933 MACA.No. 1361 of 2011() ----------------------- OPMV.1132/2008 of MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS TRIBUNAL, KOZHIKODE .................... APPELLANT/PETITIONER ------------------------ SUJITH N., AGED 22 YEARS, S/O. RAVEENDRAN, NALUPURAKKAL HOUSE, ARTS COLLEGE POST, KOZHIKODE. BY ADV. SRI.V.S.CHANDRASEKHARAN SMT.LEKSHMI SWAMINATHAN RESPONDENTS/RESPONDENTS ------------------------- 1. M.ALAVI, AGE NOT KNOWN, S/O. MOHAMMED, MANAPPADAM HOUSE, PANDIKKAD ROAD, MANJERI, MALAPPURAM. 2. K.M.ABDUL NAZAR, S/O. K.MOHAMMED, (2ND RESPONDENT DELETED AS PER ORDER IN I.A. DTD. 7.12.09). 3. THE ORIENTAL INSURANCE CO. LTD., DIVISIONAL OFFICE, SEEMA BUILDINGS, G.H.ROAD, KOZHIKODE. ADV. SRI.GEORGE CHERIAN (THIRUVALLA) FOR R3 THIS MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS APPEAL HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 13/10/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: R.BASANT & M.C.HARI RANI, JJ. * * * * * * * * * * * * * M.A.C.A.No.1361 of 2011 ---------------------------------------- Dated this the 13th day of October 2011 J U D G M E N T R.BASANT,J Claimant is the appellant. He claimed compensation for the personal injuries suffered by him in a motor accident which took place on 06/01/2008. Against a total claim of Rs.2,00,000/-, the tribunal awarded a total amount of Rs.1,18,669/- as compensation as per the details given in paragraph 10 of the impugned award which we extract below: Sl. No Head of claim Amount claimed (Rs.) Amount awarded (Rs) Details 1. Transport 1,000/- 300/- -- 2. Extra nourishment 3,000/- 500/- -- 3. Loss of earnings 25,000/- 5,000/- 2500 x 2 months 4 Bystander's expenses Nil 1,900 100 x 19 days 5 Treatment expenses 25,000/- 3,769/- Entire bill amount 6 Pain and suffering 25,000/- 10,000/- -- 7 Loss of amen 70,000/- 97,200/- 2500x12x18x18x100 Total 1,18,669/- 7% interest from 16/9/2008 2. The appellant claims to be aggrieved by the impugned award. Challenge is only on the plank that the quantum of compensation awarded is inadequate. Insurer has been made M.A.C.A.No.1361 of 2011 2 entirely liable. We have heard the learned counsel for the appellant and the learned counsel for the insurance company. 3. Called upon to explain and be specific, the learned counsel for the appellant contends that the monthly income reckoned by the tribunal at Rs.2,500/- is too low. The accident had taken place in 2008. The claimant is a young man aged 22 years. The tribunal ought to have taken note of clause 6 of schedule 2 of the M.V.Act which came into existence in 1994. The tribunal should have taken note of the decision in Lata Wadhwa and Others v. State of Bihar and Others [2001 SC 3218] and Laxmi Devi v. Mohammad Tabbar [2008 ACJ 1488]. In any view of the matter, Rs.3,500/- must have been reckoned as the monthly income, contends counsel. We readily agree. The appellant was an in-patient for 19 days. The tribunal had accepted the same. The loss of earnings was granted only for a period of two months. The learned counsel argues and we agree that the appellant must have been involuntarily unemployed for a longer period. We reckon three months as the period of involuntary unemployment. 4. Finally, the learned counsel for the appellant contends M.A.C.A.No.1361 of 2011 3 that the tribunal has not awarded any amount under the head of loss of amenities. Though an amount of Rs.97,200/- is shown to be awarded under the head of loss of amenities, it is in fact the amount of compensation awarded for reduction in earning capacity by employing the multiplier-multiplicand method. Physical disability of 18% is proved convincingly by Ext.C1 report of the medical board. The tribunal has accepted the same. Physical disability suffered by a person has two fold reflections on his life. It reduces his earning capacity. It also impairs and reduces the quality of enjoyment of life. We are satisfied that for loss of amenities, amount is liable to be awarded separately under that head. Considering the age of the claimant and the nature of disability, we are satisfied that an amount of Rs.25,000/- can be awarded under that head. 5. No other contentions are raised. The above discussions lead us to the conclusion that the appellant is entitled to a further amount of 69,380/- as compensation in addition to the amount awarded by the tribunal. i) Loss of earnings Rs.5,500/- [Rs.10,500/-(Rs.3,500/- x 3 months) minus Rs.5,000/-] M.A.C.A.No.1361 of 2011 4 ii) Reduction in earning capacity Rs.38,880/- [Rs.1,36,080/- (Rs.3,500 x 12 x 18 x 18/100) minus Rs.97,200/-] iii) Loss of amenities Rs.25,000/- ------------------ Total Rs.69,380/- ======= 6. In the result, a) This appeal is allowed in part. b) Appellant is found entitled to a further amount of Rs.69,380/- (Rupees sixty nine thousand three hundred and eighty only) in addition to the amount already awarded by the Tribunal. c) We make it clear that the entire amount of compensation shall carry interest at the rate and for the period as specified by the tribunal in the impugned award. d) All other directions of the Tribunal are upheld. (R.BASANT, JUDGE) (M.C.HARI RANI, JUDGE) jsr // True Copy// PA to Judge M.A.C.A.No.1361 of 2011 5 M.A.C.A.No.1361 of 2011 6 M.A.C.A.No.1361 of 2011 7 K.M.JOSEPH & M.C.HARI RANI, JJ. .No. of 200 ORDER/JUDGMENT 30/082010