IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE A.K.BASHEER & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.Q.BARKATH ALI THURSDAY, THE 24TH FEBRUARY 2011 / 5TH PHALGUNA 1932 MACA.No. 936 of 2008() ---------------------- OPMV.784/2004 of MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS TRIBUNAL, PUNALUR .................... APPELLANT(S): APPELLANT/PETITIONER ---------------------------------- JOBIN MATHEW, S/O M.K.MATHEW, MADATHILAZHIKATHU VEEDU, (JOBIN BHAVAN), CHENGAMANADU P.O., KOTTARAKARA. BY ADV. SRI.ALEXANDER GEORGE RESPONDENT(S): RESPONDENTS -------------------------- 1. V.MOHANAN, S/O VISWANATHAN, ALUMMOOTTIL VEEDU, MELIL P.O., KUNNIKODU, KOTTARAKARA. 2. JOHN, S/O PAPPACHEN, ALUMMOOTTIL VEEDU, CHETHADY MURI, CHENGAMANADU P.O., KOTTARAKARA. 3. THE DIVISIONAL MANAGER, NEW INDIA INSURANCE CO.LTD., KOLLAM. ADV. SRI.K.C.SANTHOSHKUMAR FOR R3 SRI.PREMCHAND R.NAIR FOR R2 SRI.TOJAN J. VATHIKULAM FOR R2 THIS MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS APPEAL HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 24/02/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: A.K.BASHEER & P.Q.BARKATH ALI, JJ. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - M.A.C.A.No.936 OF 2008 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Dated this the 24th day of February, 2011 JUDGMENT Barkath Ali, J. Appellant is the first claimant in O.P.(MV)No.784/2004 on the file of Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Punalur. In this appeal he challenges the judgment and award of the Tribunal dated August 22, 2007 awarding a compensation of Rs.26,550/- for the loss caused to him on account of the injuries sustained by him in a motor accident. He sustained the following injuries in that accident that occurred on May 29, 2004 : Multiple puncture wound on forearm upper 2 x 1 x 0.5 cm. avulsions tooth upper incisor with fracture tooth lower incisor and lacerated wound on lower lip about 4 x 2 x 1 cm. Loss of .Fracture alveolus with displacement 2. The accident happened while the appellant was walking along Kollam Chenkotta NH 208. When he reached near Chengamanadu, he was knocked down by the mini lorry bearing Reg.No.KL/2/A/8436 driven by the second respondent. Alleging negligence against the second respondent, the appellant filed the O.P. before the Tribunal under Section 166 of Motor Vehicles Act claiming MACA.No.936/2008 2 a compensation of Rs.3,70,000/-. 3. Respondents 1 and 2, the owner and the driver of the offending lorry remained absent before the Tribunal. The third respondent, the insurer of the offending lorry filed a written statement admitting the policy. 4. PW1 was examined and Exts.A1 to A11 series were marked on the side of the claimant before the Tribunal. No evidence was adduced by the contesting third respondent. The Tribunal on an appreciation of evidence found that the accident occurred due to the rash and negligent driving of the offending mini lorry by second respondent and awarded a compensation of Rs. 26,550/- with interest @ 7.5% per annum from the date of petition till realisation and a cost of Rs.750/-. The claimant has now come up in appeal challenging the quantum of 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 second respondent is not challenged in this appeal. Therefore, the only MACA.No.936/2008 3 question which arises for consideration is whether the claimant is entitled to any enhanced compensation. 7. The Tribunal awarded a total compensation of Rs.26,550/-. The break up of the compensation amount awarded is as under: Transport to hospital - Rs. 500/- Extra nourishment - Rs. 500/- Damage to clothing - Rs. 300/- Medical expenses - Rs.10,000/- Bystander expenses - Rs. 250/- Pain and suffering - Rs. 5,000/- Loss of amenities - Rs.10,000/- 8. Counsel for the claimant sought enhancement of compensation for pain and suffering endured and for loss of amenities and enjoyment of life. He pointed out no compensation was awarded for the disability caused to the claimant. 9. The claimant has lost three teeth and fracture of four teeth. Taking into consideration the above aspect, we feel that the claimant is entitled to compensation for the disability caused on account of loss of teeth. In the circumstances of the case, we feel that a compensation of Rs. 30,000/- would be reasonable for the disability caused to the claimant. 10. The Tribunal awarded Rs.10,000/- for loss of amenities MACA.No.936/2008 4 and enjoyment in life and Rs.5,000/- for pain and suffering endured. Taking into consideration the nature of the injuries sustained by the claimant, we feel that an additional compensation of Rs. 5,000/- for loss of amenities and enjoyment in life and another additional compensation of 10,000/- for pain and suffering endured would be reasonable. As regards the compensation awarded under other heads, we find the same to be reasonable and therefore we are not disturbing the same. 11. In the result, the claimant is found entitled to an additional compensation of Rs. 45,000/-. He is entitled to interest @ 7.5% per annum from the date of petition till realisation and proportionate cost. The third respondent being the insurer of the offending vehicle shall deposit the amount before the Tribunal within two months from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment. 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 sv. MACA.No.936/2008 5