IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE A.K.BASHEER & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.Q.BARKATH ALI WEDNESDAY, THE 16TH FEBRUARY 2011 / 27TH MAGHA 1932 MACA.No. 1570 of 2004() ----------------------- OPMV.126/1997 of MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS TRIBUNAL, PUNALUR .................... APPELLANT/ PETITIONER ------------------------ A.PRAKASH, S/O.ACHUTHAN, CHARUVILA PUTHEN VEEDU, KAITHAKOTTU, AKKONAM MURI, CHADAYAMANGALAM. BY ADV. SRI.V.SANTHARAM SRI.ALEX ANTONY SEBASTIAN P.A. RESPONDENT(S): RESPONDENTS -------------------------- 1. CHRISTAPHER COLUMBUS, S/O.SUNDARAN, RAILWAY SOUTH, DOOR NO.218, PANNAMMAPOTTA, SELAM, SELAM DISTRICT, TAMILNADU. 2. THIRU S. YARUDAPPAN, S/O.SEDLAPPA GOUNDER, REDDIPPETTA POST, NAMAKKAL, TAMIL NADU. 3. UNITED INDIA INSURANCE CO. LTD., NAMAKKAL BRANCH, TAMILNADU, REP. BY ITS BRANCH MANAGER, NAMAKKAL, TAMILNADU. 4. D.SUNDARAN, S/O.DANIEL, 218, RAILWAY SOUTH, MAJEETH STREET, PONNAMMAPPETT, SELAM-1, TAMILNADU. ADV. SRI.A.R.GEORGE FOR R3 THIS MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS APPEAL HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 16/02/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: A.K.BASHEER & P.Q.BARKATH ALI, JJ. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - M.A.C.A.No.1570 OF 2004 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Dated this the 16th day of February, 2011 JUDGMENT Barkath Ali, J. Appellant is the claimant in O.P.(MV)No.126/1997 on the file of Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Punalur. In this appeal, he challenges the judgment and award of the Tribunal dated February 16, 2004 awarding a compensation of Rs.63,712/- 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 December 22, 1996 at about 1.30.p.m. Lacerated wound anterior aspect of lower thigh 2 cm. x 1 cm. ( right) Lacerated wound penetrating of the bone 2 cm. x 1 cm. 2. The accident happened while the claimant was unloading the marble slabs from the lorry bearing Reg.No.TAL/4885. At that time, the driver of the lorry, the first respondent took the vehicle forward and as a result of which the marble slabs fell over him and he sustained serious injuries. Alleging negligence against the driver of MACA.No.1570/2004 2 the lorry, the claimant filed the O.P. before the Tribunal under Section 166 of Motor Vehicles Act claiming a compensation of Rs. 2,40,000/-. 3. Respondents 1, 3 and 4 are the driver, insurer and owner of the offending vehicle. Mistakenly, the second respondent was initially shown as the owner of the offending vehicle The first respondent filed a written statement admitting the accident, but attributed negligence to the claimant. The third respondent, the insurer of the offending vehicle filed a written statement admitting the policy. 4. This O.P. was jointly tried along with other O.P. filed by the legal heirs of deceased Salim who was also unloading the marble slabs along with the claimant and a common award was passed by the Tribunal. PW1 was examined and Exts.A1 to A25 were marked on the side of the claimant before the Tribunal. Ext.B1 was marked on the side of the contesting third respondent. The Tribunal on an appreciation of evidence found that the accident occurred due to the negligence of the driver of the lorry and awarded a compensation of Rs. 63,712/- with interest @ 6% per annum from the date of petition till realisation and a cost of Rs. 500/-. The claimant has now come up in appeal challenging MACA.No.1570/2004 3 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 driver of the lorry 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.63,712/-. The break up of the compensation amount awarded is as under: Loss of earnings - Rs. 4,500/- Transportation - Rs. 1,000/- Extra nourishment - Rs. 1,000/- Bystander expenses - Rs. 1,000/- Medical expenses - Rs. 7,332/- Pain and suffering - Rs.10,000/- Disability - Rs. 38,880/- 8. Counsel for the claimant sought enhancement of compensation for the disability caused, for pain and suffering endued and for loss of amenities and enjoyment in life. 9. The Tribunal took the monthly income of the claimant as MACA.No.1570/2004 4 Rs.1,500/- and took the percentage of disability as 12% and adopted a multiplier of 18 and awarded Rs. 38,880/- for the disability caused. According to the claimant, he was a head load worker. Ext.A10 is the identity card showing the same. Ext.A11 is the identity card which shows that the claimant was a member of the Kerala Karshaka Thozhilali Kshemanidhi Padhathi. Taking into consideration the above aspect, we feel that the monthly income of the claimant can be reasonably fixed at Rs. 2,500/-. The percentage of disability as 12% and the multiplier as 18 taken by the Tribunal are not seriously challenged. Thus calculated for the disability caused, the claimant is entitled to a compensation of Rs.64,800/- ( 2500 x 12 x 18 x 12%) Thus on this count, the claimant is entitled to an additional compensation of Rs.25,920/-. 10. The Tribunal awarded Rs.10,000/- for pain and suffering endured by the claimant. Taking into consideration the nature of the injuries sustained by the claimant, we feel that a compensation of Rs. 25,000/- would be reasonable on this count. 11. No compensation is seen awarded for loss of amenities and MACA.No.1570/2004 5 enjoyment in life. Having regard to the nature of the injuries sustained by the claimant, we feel that a compensation of Rs. 20,000/- would be reasonable on this count. 12. There is another aspect in this case. The Tribunal awarded Rs. 4,500/- towards loss of earnings for 3 months @ Rs. 1,500/- per month. The nature of the injuries sustained by the claimant shows that he must have been disabled for atleast six months. As we have fixed the monthly income of the claimant as Rs. 2,500/-, he is entitled to a compensation of Rs. 15,000/- ( 2500 x 6) towards loss of earnings. Thus on this count, the claimant is entitled to an additional compensation of Rs. 10,500/-. As regards the compensation awarded under other heads, we find the same to be reasonable and therefore we are not disturbing the same. 13. There is another aspect in this case. The Tribunal awarded interest only @ 6% per annum which appears to be very low. The claimant is entitled to interest @ 7.5% per annum from the date of petition till realisation for the compensation already awarded and also for the enhanced compensation. MACA.No.1570/2004 6 14. In the result, the claimant is found entitled to an additional compensation of Rs. 71,420/-. He is entitled to interest @ 7.5% per annum from the date of petition till realisation for the compensation already awarded and also for the enhanced compensation 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.1570/2004 7