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 4TH JANUARY 2011 / 14TH POUSHA 1932 MACA.No. 840 of 2006() ----------------------------- OPMV.326/1998 of MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS TRIBUNAL, IRINJALAKUDA ........................ APPELLANT/PETITIONER. ------------------------------ V.K.VENU, S/O.KARAPPAN, VAYAKKAPPADI HOUSE, PANTHALLUR, NELLAYI P.O. THRISSUR DISTRICT. BY ADVS. SRI.M.V.THAMBAN SRI.SREEKANTH.K.R RESPONDENT(S): RESPONDENTS --------------------------------------- 1. SADANANDAN V.K. S/O.KUMARAN, VADAKKEDATH HOUSE, NELLAY P.O. THRISSUR DISTRICT. 2. MARY, W/O.LATE VARUNNY, MANJALY HOUSE, P.O. PUNALUR. 3. BENNUY, S/O.LATE VARUNNY, MANJALY HOUSE, P.O. PUNLUR. 4. BABU, S/O.LATE VARUNNY, MANJALY HOUSE, P.O.PUNALUR. 5. THE BRANCH MANAGER, ORIENTAL INSURANCE CO.LTD., U BROTHER BUILDING, GURUVAYOOR ROAD, KUNNAMKULAM, THRISSUR DISTRICT. R5 BY ADV. SRI.VPK.PANICKER THIS MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS APPEAL HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 04/01/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: svs A.K.BASHEER & P.Q. BARKATH ALI, JJ. =~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~==~=~=~= M.A.C.A. No. 840 of 2006 =~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~==~=~=~= Dated this the 4th day of January, 2011 JUDGMENT Barkath Ali, J. Appellant is the claimant in O.P.(MV) No.326 of 1998 on the file of the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Irinjalakuda. In this appeal he challenges the judgment and award of the Tribunal dated June 17, 2005 awarding a compensation of Rs.1,03,769/- for the loss caused to him on account of the injuries sustained by him in a motor accident . 2. The accident happened on September 20, 1997 at about 7.30 a.m. on the Ernakulam – Thrissur National Highway at Nandhikkara. An auto-rickshaw bearing registration No.KL-8/F 1716 in which the claimant was travelling dashed against the back side of a lorry bearing registration No.KL-M 6759. The claimant sustained the following injuries in the accident:- 1)Lost eye sight of left eye. 2) Fracture of left zygomatic complex MACA 840/2006 2 3) Fracture nasal bone. 4) Lacerated wounds below eye lid, gum of right upper jaw and chin. Alleging negligence against the 1st respondent driver of the offending auto-rickshaw the claimant filed the O.P. before the Tribunal under section 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act claiming a compensation of Rs.2 lakhs. 3. The 1st respondent driver of the offending auto- rickshaw filed a written statement admitting the accident but denied the liability. The 2nd respondent owner of the offending auto-rickshaw died during the pendency of the O.P. Therefore, his legal heirs are impleaded as additional respondents 4 to 6. They remained absent before the Tribunal. The 3rd respondent, insurer of the offending auto- rickshaw, filed a written statement admitting the policy but attributed negligence to the driver of the lorry involved in the accident. 4. PWs. 1 and 2 were examined and Exts.A1 to A13 were marked on the side of the claimant. No evidence was MACA 840/2006 3 adduced by the respondents. On an appreciation of the evidence, the Tribunal found that the accident occurred due to negligence of the 1st respondent and awarded a compensation of Rs. 1,03,769/- with interest @ 6% p.a. from the date of petition till realization. The claimant has come up in appeal challenging the quantum of compensation awarded by the Tribunal. 5. Heard the learned counsel for the claimant and learned counsel for the Insurance Company. 6. The accident is not disputed. The finding of the Tribunal that the accident occurred due to the negligence of the 1st respondent is not seriously 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.1,03,769/-. Break up of the compensation awarded is as under:- Transport to hospital : Rs. 300 MACA 840/2006 4 Cost of extra nourishment : Rs. 600 and wages to attendants. Medical expenses : Rs. 1,469 Loss of earning : Rs. 4,500 Pain and suffering : Rs. 7,500 Loss of amenities and : Rs. 3,000 Permanent partial disability : Rs. 86,400 ------------------ Total : Rs.1,03,769 ======= 8. The learned counsel for the appellant/claimant sought enhancement of compensation for the disability caused, pain and suffering endured and loss of amenities and enjoyment in life. 9. The Tribunal took the monthly income of the claimant as Rs.1,500/-, took the percentage of disability as 30%, adopted multiplier of 16 and awarded Rs.86,400/- towards disability caused. The claimant testified as PW1 that he used to earn Rs.4,500/- per month as a Goldsmith. Taking into consideration the above aspect, we feel that his monthly income can reasonably be fixed at Rs.2,000/- . The percentage of disability as 30% and multiplier as 16 adopted by the Tribunal are not seriously challenged. Thus MACA 840/2006 5 calculated for the disability caused, the claimant is entitled to a compensation of Rs.1,15,200/- (Rs.2,000/- x 12 x 16 x 30%). Thus, the claimant is entitled to an additional compensation of Rs. 28,800/- on this count. 10. The Tribunal awarded Rs.7,500/- for pain and suffering endured by the claimant and Rs.3,000/- towards loss of amenities and enjoyment in life. As the claimant has lost sight of left eye, we feel that a compensation of Rs.10,000/- for pain and suffering endured and another Rs.10,000/- for loss of amenities and enjoyment in life would be reasonable. 11. The Tribunal awarded Rs.4.500/- for loss of earnings for three months at the rate of Rs.1,500/-. As we have fixed his monthly income as Rs.2,000/- the claimant is entitled to Rs.6,000/- for the loss of earning. As regards the compensation awarded under other heads, we find the same to be reasonable and therefore, we are not disturbing the same. 12. In the result, the claimant is found entitled to an MACA 840/2006 6 additional compensation of Rs.39,800/-. The Tribunal awarded interest only @ 6% per annum, which appears to be very low. He is entitled to interest @ 7.5% per annum from the date of petition till realization for the compensation already awarded and also for the enhanced compensation. The 3rd respondent Insurance Company shall deposit the amount within two months from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment with notice to the claimant. 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. mn