IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE R.BASANT & THE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE M.C.HARI RANI TUESDAY, THE 20TH SEPTEMBER 2011 / 29TH BHADRA 1933 MACA.No. 1320 of 2011 ----------------------- OPMV.1340/2008 of MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS TRIBUNAL, KOZHIKODE .................... APPELLANT/: PETITIONER ------------------------ PANDU, AGED 50 YEARS, S/O.RAJALU, C/O.SIVAKUMAR, PRASANNA NIVAS, PUTHUKKIDI MEETHAL HOUSE, GURUVAYOORAPPAN COLLEGE POST, KOZHIKODE. BY ADV. SRI.V.S.CHANDRASEKHARAN SMT.LEKSHMI SWAMINATHAN RESPONDENTS: --------------- 1. JOCI.C.V, AGE NOT KNOWN, CHUNGATH VILLA, PUTHIYARA POST, KOZHIKODE. 2. K.KRISHNAN, AGED 72 YEARS, S/O.IMBICHIKANNAN, KARAKKUNNINMEL HOUSE, NELLIKODE POST, CHEVYAUR, KOZHIKODE. 3. THE ORIENTAL INSURANCE COMPANY LTD., DIVISIONAL OFFICE, SEEMA BUILDINGS, GH ROAD, KOZHIKODE. 4. PRASANNAN, AGED 47 YEARS, S/O.SIVAKUMAR, PRASANNA NIVAS, GURUVAYOORAPPAN COLLEGE, PALAZHI MILK COMPANY, KOZHIKODE. ADV. SRI.P.JAYASANKAR FOR R3 SRI.GEORGE CHERIAN(THIRUVALLA) THIS MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS APPEAL HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 20/09/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: R. BASANT & M.C. HARI RANI, JJ. ------------------------------------------------- M.A.C.A. No. 1320 of 2011 ------------------------------------------------- Dated this the 20th day of September, 2011 JUDGMENT Basant, J. The claimant is the appellant. He claimed compensation for personal injuries suffered by him in a motor accident which took place on 12/11/2007. He claimed an amount of Rs.2,00,000/- as compensation. He had suffered open fracture both bones of the right leg type III and montaggia fracture dislocation right. He was an inpatient for a period of 7 days. He had suffered permanent disability which was assessed by the Medical Board at 29%. The claimant is a Barbar by profession. The Tribunal awarded an amount of Rs.1,35,641/- as compensation as per the details given in paragraph-10 of the impugned award which we extract below: Sl.N o. Head of Claim Amount claimed Amount Awarded Details 1 Transport 2,000/- 500/- -- 2 Extra nourishment 2,000/- 500/- -- 3 Loss of earnings 30,000/- 6,000/- 3000 x 2 months MACA 1320/2011 2 Sl.N o. Head of Claim Amount claimed Amount Awarded Details 4 Bystander's expenses Nil 600/- 100 x 6 days 5 Treatment expenses 50,000/- 3,201/- Entire bill amounts 6 Pain and suffering 30,000/- 10,000/- -- 7 Permanent disability 70,000/- 1,14,840/ - 3000 x 12 x 11 x 29/100 Total 1,35,641 /- 7% interest from 05/11/2009 2. The insurance company has been made entirely liable to satisfy the award. We have heard the learned counsel for the appellant and the learned counsel for the insurance company. We do not think it necessary to wait for issue and return of notice to the other respondents. The challenge is raised only against the quantum of compensation awarded by the Tribunal. 3. Called upon to explain and be specific the learned counsel for the appellant assails the impugned award firstly on the ground that the monthly income reckoned by the Tribunal is inadequate. It is next contended that the multiplier 11 reckoned by the Tribunal is not correct. It is further submitted that the Tribunal erred in not awarding any compensation under the head of loss of amenities. Incidentally, challenge is raised against the amount awarded under every other head also. MACA 1320/2011 3 4. In the absence of better evidence, the Tribunal drew the presumption of prudence that the claimant must have been earning an income of Rs.3,000/- per month. In the absence of any better evidence, we find no reason to interfere with the said finding invoking our appellate jurisdiction. The appellant asserted that he was aged 50 years. No specific evidence was placed before the court to identify whether he had completed the age of 50 years or not. The Tribunal, in these circumstances, reckoned him as a person belonging to the age group of 50—55 years. Following the dictum in Sarla Verma v. D.T.C.[ (2009) 6 S.C.C.121], the multiplier was reckoned as 11. We find no reason to invoke our appellate jurisdiction to interfere with the choice of the multiplier. 5. 29% disability was assessed by the Medical Board under Ext.C1. The appellant was a person aged 54 years. Though the counsel asserts that he was aged only 50 years, the cause title shows him age to be 54 years. The fact remains that the appellant will have to live with this disability for a long period of time – for the rest of his life. The appellant is certainly entitled for compensation for loss of amenities of life. 29% physical disability is proved convincingly by Ext.C1. This physical disability has two fold reflections on a person's life. It reduces MACA 1320/2011 4 the earning capacity. It also reduces and impairs the quality of enjoyment of life of the victim. For the latter dimension of the loss suffered, no compensation has been awarded. We are satisfied that that omission on the part of the Tribunal deserves to be corrected. Considering the extent of physical disability and the age of the appellant, we are satisfied that an amount of Rs.20,000/- deserves to be awarded under the head of loss of amenities. In coming to the conclusion, we have taken note of all possible dimensions of the loss of amenities including the disabilities, inconvenience, discomfiture and the shortened expectation of life. 6. We are not satisfied that the amount awarded under any other head deserves or warrants interference. 7. In the result, a) this appeal is allowed in part. b)The appellant is found entitled to a further amount of Rs.20,000/- (Rupees twenty thousand 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 MACA 1320/2011 5 the period as specified by the Tribunal. d)All other directions of the Tribunal are upheld. Sd/- R. BASANT, JUDGE Sd/- M.C. HARI RANI, JUDGE Nan/ks. True copy P.S.to Judge