IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE R.BASANT & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE C.T.RAVIKUMAR WEDNESDAY, THE 11TH MARCH 2009 / 20TH PHALGUNA 1930 MACA.No. 589 of 2007() ---------------------- OPMV.2294/2001 of MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS TRIBUNAL, KOTTAYAM .................... APPELLANT(S): APPELLANT/PETITIONER ---------------------------------- THANKACHAN @ THOMAS SEBASTIAN, PONMALA HOUSE, MANNANAM KARA, AMALAGIRI P.O., ATHIRAMPUZHA, KOTTAYAM. BY ADV. SRI.PHILIP T.VARGHESE SRI.THOMAS T.VARGHESE RESPONDENT(S): --------------- 1. REGIMON.V.N., MADATHILPARAMBIL HOUSE, MANNANAM P.O., ATHIRAMPUZHA. 2. M.NOORUDHEEN KUNJU, NILZAM MANZIL, PERUNNA EAST P.O., CHANGANACHERRY. 3. THE NEW INDIA INSURANCE CO.LTD., ETTUMANOOR. ADV. SRI.J.DEVADANAM FOR R2 SRI.VINOD J.DEV FOR R2 SRI.PRAMOD J.DEV FOR R2 SRI.M.RAJAGOPALAN FOR R3 THIS MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS APPEAL HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 10/03/2009, THE COURT ON 11/03/2009 PASSED THE FOLLOWING: R.BASANT & C.T.RAVIKUMAR, JJ. ------------------------------------ M.A.C.A. No.589 of 2007 ------------------------------------- Dated this the 11th day of March, 2009 JUDGMENT BASANT, J. Claimant before the Tribunal is the appellant before us. He claimed compensation for personal injuries suffered by him in a motor accident, which occurred on 2.6.2001. He claimed to be a 40 year old mosaic worker earning a monthly income of Rs.4,000/- per mensem. He had suffered crush injury on his right hand. He was an inpatient for one day, but plaster cast was applied for 28 days. He was directed to get the wound dressing done in the local hospital. He had allegedly suffered permanent disability which was certified to be 8% by a doctor who issued Ext.A10 disability certificate. Before the Tribunal the claimant examined himself as PW1. Another claimant in a connected claim was examined as PW2. Exts.A1 to A19 were marked. 2. The Tribunal on an anxious consideration of all the relevant inputs came to the conclusion that the appellant is entitled for an amount of Rs.13,700/- as compensation as per the details given below: M.A.C.A. No.589 of 2007 2 i) Loss of earnings : Rs.4,000/- [2000 X 2] ii) Transport to hospital : Rs.500/- iii) Medical bills : Rs.200/- iv) Pain and suffering : Rs.6,000/- v) Loss of amenities : Rs.3,000/- ................ Total : Rs.13,700/- ................. There was also a direction to pay interest @ 6% per annum from the date of the petition till payment. 3. The appellant claims to be aggrieved by the impugned award. Called upon to explain the nature of the challenge which the appellant wants to mount against the impugned award, the learned counsel for the appellant first of all contends that he is an expert mosaic worker and reckoning only Rs.2,000/- per mensem as the income for a 40 year old skilled worker is extremely unreasonable and unrealistic. Even for a non earning person, from 1994 law permits drawal of a presumption of prudence that he must be earning Rs.1,250/- per mensem. We find merit in the challenge. We are satisfied that Rs.3,000/- per mensem can in M.A.C.A. No.589 of 2007 3 the circumstances of this case be reckoned as the monthly income of the claimant. He is therefore entitled to a further amount of Rs.2,000/- (2000 X 3 minus 4000) under the head of loss of earnings. 4. The learned counsel for the appellant then contends that medical expenses awarded of Rs.200/- is extremely inadequate. Though he was an inpatient only for one day, it should not be lost sight of that he had been in plaster and was directed to get the wound dressed in a local hospital for 28 days. Bills were produced only for Rs.200/- and that amount alone was awarded by the Tribunal. In these circumstances, we are satisfied that a further amount of Rs.1,300/- (ie. 1500 minus 200) can be awarded under the head medical and miscellaneous expenses. 5. For pain and suffering only an amount of Rs.6,000/- has been awarded. There is nothing to show that any bony injury was suffered. In fact the certificate shows that there was no such bony injury at all. A lacerated wound on the dorsum of the right thumb with crush avulsion of extensor polis tendon right is M.A.C.A. No.589 of 2007 4 the injury suffered. We are satisfied that under the head of pain and suffering, an amount of Rs.4,000/- more (10,000 minus 6,000) can be awarded. 6. We have gone through Ext.A10. It is confirmed that there was no bony injury. Though Ext.A10 shows that there was a permanent physical disability of 8%, the Tribunal was not prepared to accept the same. The author of Ext.A10 has not been examined. We do not find any error warranting interference in the Tribunal not accepting that there was reduction in earning capacity. The Tribunal noted the physical disability and awarded payment of an amount of Rs.3,000/- under the head of loss of amenities. We are not persuaded to interfere with the finding that there is no evidence to prove reduction/loss of earning capacity. However we are persuaded to agree that a higher amount of compensation can be awarded under the head of loss of amenities. We hold that the appellant is entitled for a further amount of Rs.5,000/- (ie. 8000 minus 3000) under the head of loss of amenities. M.A.C.A. No.589 of 2007 5 7. The learned counsel for the appellant then submits that interest has been awarded only @ 6% per annum. Interest must have been awarded at least @ 7.5% per annum, contends the learned counsel for the appellant with the help of precedents. We are persuaded to accept that contention made on the rate of interest. 8. On the basis of the above discussions, we come to the conclusion that the appellant is entitled to the following further amount as compensation in addition to the amounts already awarded by the Tribunal. i) Medical and miscellaneous expenses : Rs.1,300/- more (1500 minus 200) ii) Pain and suffering : Rs.4,000/- more (10000 minus 6000) iii) Loss of earnings : Rs.2,000/- more (2 X 3000 minus 4000) iv) Loss of amenities : Rs.5,000/- more (8000 minus 3000) ................. Total : Rs.12,300/- ................. (Rupees Twelve thousand and three hundred only) M.A.C.A. No.589 of 2007 6 9. We further direct that the entire amount of compensation shall fetch interest @ 7.5% per annum from the date of the petition till payment. 10. This appeal is accordingly allowed in part to the above extent. (R.BASANT, JUDGE) (C.T.RAVIKUMAR, JUDGE) rtr/-