IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE A.K.BASHEER & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.Q.BARKATH ALI TUESDAY, THE 30TH NOVEMBER 2010 / 9TH AGRAHAYANA 1932 MACA.No. 2214 of 2010() ---------------------------------- OPMV.1078/2000 of MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS TRIBUNAL, MANJERI .................... APPELLANT(S): PETITIONER ----------------------------------------- HAMEED, S/O.KUNHAREMU HAJI, CHEMPATTIYIL HOUSE, KUNNUMPURAM, KUTTOOR NORTH P.O., A.R.NAGAR, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.BABU S. NAIR RESPONDENT(S): 2ND RESPONDENT -------------------------------------------------------- UNITED INDIA INSURANCE CO.LTD., MANJERI, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT, PIN-676 121. ADV. SRI.M.A.GEORGE THIS MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS APPEAL HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 30/11/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: tss A.K.BASHEER & P.Q.BARKATH ALI, JJ. =~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~==~=~=~= M.A.C.A.No.2214 OF 2010 =~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~==~=~=~= Dated this the 30th day of November, 2010 JUDGMENT Barkath Ali, J. Appellant is the claimant in O.P.(MV)No.1078/2000 on the file of Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Manjeri. In this appeal he challenges the judgment and award of the Tribunal dated October 26, 2004 awarding a compensation of Rs.64,320/- for the loss caused to him on account of the injuries sustained by him in a motor accident. He sustained the following injuries in the accident that occurred on September 9, 1999 at about 12.30 p.m.: “Compound fracture olecranon, lacerated wound right parietal area, abrasion over right elbow 10 x 5 cm. and contusion back of right shoulder.” 2. The accident happened while the claimant was travelling in an auto-rickshaw bearing Reg.No.KL-10/E-9887 from Kunnumpuram to Kondotty, a Maruthi car bearing registration No.KL-10/C-5506 driven by first respondent came MACA 2214/2010 2 in a rash and negligent manner and dashed against the auto- rickshaw, as a result of which the claimant sustained the injuries. Alleging negligence against the first respondent, owner-cum-driver of the offending car, the claimant filed the O.P. before the Tribunal under Section 166 of Motor Vehicles Act claiming a compensation of Rs. 1,50,000/-. 3. First respondent, the owner-cum-driver of the offending Maruthi car, remained absent before the Tribunal. Second respondent, the insurer of the offending auto-rickshaw, filed a written statement admitting the policy. 4. PW1 was examined and Exts.A1 to A10 were marked on the side of the claimant before the Tribunal. No evidence was adduced on the side of the respondents. The Tribunal, on an appreciation of evidence, found that the accident occurred due to rash and negligent driving of the offending Maruthi car by first respondent and awarded a compensation of Rs. 64,320/- with interest @ 6% per annum from the date of petition till realization and a cost of Rs.1,000/-. The claimant has now come up in appeal challenging the quantum of MACA 2214/2010 3 compensation awarded by the Tribunal. 5. Heard the counsel for the appellant/claimant and the counsel for the Insurance Company. 6. The accident is not disputed. The finding of the Tribunal that the accident occurred due to the negligence on the part of the first 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. 7. The Tribunal awarded a total compensation of Rs. 63,320/- (Mistakenly shown as Rs.64,320/-). The break up of the compensation awarded by the Tribunal is as under : Transport to hospital - Rs. 500/- Extra nourishment and bystander expenses - Rs. 1,000/- Medical expenses - Rs. 53,820/- Pain and suffering - Rs. 8,000/- ----------------- Total Rs.63,320/- ======= 8. The Tribunal awarded a total compensation of Rs. 64,320/-. But the total amount will come to Rs.63,320/- only. MACA 2214/2010 4 Hence, the award of the Tribunal is corrected as Rs.63,320/-. 9. Learned counsel for the claimant sought enhancement of compensation for pain and suffering endured by the claimant. The learned counsel for the claimant pointed out that no compensation was awarded by the Tribunal for loss of earnings and loss of amenities and enjoyment in life. 10. The Tribunal awarded a compensation of Rs.8,000/- for pain and suffering endured by the claimant. Taking into account the nature of the injuries sustained by the claimant, we feel that an additional compensation of Rs.15,000/- would be reasonable on this count. 11. The Tribunal has not awarded any compensation for the loss of amenities and enjoyment in life. Taking into consideration the nature of the injuries, we feel that a compensation of Rs.15,000/- would be reasonable on this count. 12. No compensation was awarded by the Tribunal for the loss of earnings. The claimant was a coolie earning Rs.3,000/-, as testified by him as PW1. Taking into account the MACA 2214/2010 5 above fact, we feel that the monthly income of the claimant can reasonably be fixed at Rs.2,500/-. Considering the nature of injuries sustained by him, he must have disabled for four months, for which he is entitled to an amount of Rs.10,000/-. 13. In the result, the claimant is found entitled to an additional compensation of Rs.40,000/-. The Tribunal awarded interest only @ 6% per annum, which appears to be very low. He is entitled to interest @ 7.5% from the date of petition till realization for the compensation already awarded and also for the enhanced compensation. The 2nd respondent shall deposit the amount within two months from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment with notice to the claimant. The appeal is disposed of as found above. A.K.BASHEER, JUDGE P.Q.BARKATH ALI, JUDGE mn MACA 2214/2010 6