IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE R.BASANT & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE N.K.BALAKRISHNAN MONDAY, THE 5TH SEPTEMBER 2011 / 14TH BHADRA 1933 MACA.No. 1392 of 2011() ---------------------------------- OPMV.276/2011 of ADDL.MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS TRIBUNAL, ERNAKULAM .................... APPELLANT(S): PETITIONERS ------------------------------------------- K.K.KHADER, AGED 48 YEARS, S/O.KUNJU MOHAMMED, CHITTAPPALLY VEETTIL, 23/1002, PALLURUTHY, COCHIN-6. BY ADV. SRI.R.SUDHISH SMT.M.MANJU SRI.K.R.RANJITH RESPONDENT(S): RESPONDENT ---------------------------------------------- 1. C.I.BEERAN, S/O.ISMAIL, CHITTECH HOUSE, VAZHAKKALA, KAKKANAD WEST P.O., COCHIN-682030. 2. K.K.GOPINATHAN, S/O.KANDAPPU, KOTTAKKAL HOUSE, THOPPILKAD, MUPPATHEDAM P.O., ALUVA-683110. 3. NATIONAL INSURANCE COMPANY LIMITED, BY ITS REGIONAL MANAGER, REGIONAL OFFICE, MUTHOOT TOWERS, M.G.ROAD, COCHIN-682035. R3 BY ADV. SRI.E.M.JOSEPH THIS MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS APPEAL HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 05/09/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: tss R. BASANT & N.K.BALAKRISHNAN, JJ. ------------------------------------- M.A.C.A. No.1392 of 2011 ----------------------------------- Dated this the 5th day of September 2011 O R D E R R. Basant, J. Claimant is the appellant. He claimed compensation for personal injuries suffered by him in a motor accident which took place on 25.5.1999. Against the total claim of `15 lakhs the Tribunal awarded an amount of `5,14,443/- as per the details given in paragraph 20 of the award which we extract below :- “Loss of earning (6 months) - Rs. 15,000.00 Transportation expenses - Rs. 2,000.00 Damage to clothes - Rs. 500.00 Extra nourishment - Rs. 2,000.00 Medical expenses - Rs. 72,443.00 (supported by bills) Attendant expenses - Rs. 7,500.00 Shock, pain and sufferings - Rs. 40,000.00 Compensation for continuing & permanent disability - Rs.3,15,000.00 (2500x12x70x15) M.A.C.A. No.1392 of 2011 -: 2 :- Compensation for loss of earning power - Rs. 00.00 Loss of amenities and enjoyment in life - Rs. 30,000.00 Compensation for disfiguration - Rs. 20,000.00 Compensation for short expectation in life - Rs. 00.00 Future treatment - Rs. 10,000.00 ------------------------ Total - Rs. 5,14,443.00 ========== The challenge is raised only against the quantum of compensation awarded. Called upon to explain and be specific, the learned counsel for the appellant challenges the impugned award on various grounds. 2. The appellant was an inpatient for 75 days. He had suffered multiple injuries including fractures. Left leg amputation below knee had to be undertaken. The appellant produced certificate of disability which shows that 70% was the physical disability suffered. He claimed to be engaged in the business of selling fish. He claimed to be earning Rs.6,000/- per mensum. 3. The learned counsel for the appellant assails the M.A.C.A. No.1392 of 2011 -: 3 :- impugned award on various grounds. First of all it is contended that the monthly income reckoned by the Tribunal is grossly inadequate. The learned counsel submits that even in the absence of better and more authentic evidence, the Tribunal should have drawn appropriate inference of prudence on the basis of the decisions in Laxmi Devi & others v. Mohammad Tabbar and another [2008 ACJ 1488] and Lata Wadhwa and others v. State of Bihar and others [AIR 2001 SC 3218]. We agree with the learned counsel for the appellant. We are satisfied Rs.3,000/- can safely be assumed to be the monthly income of the appellant on 25.5.1999, the date of the accident. 4. The learned counsel for the appellant submits that the Tribunal erred in reckoning 70% as the reduction in earning capacity also. Physical disability and reduction in earning capacity are not synonymous terms. The disability in the instant case of 70% must safely be assumed to result in higher percentage of reduction in earning capacity, M.A.C.A. No.1392 of 2011 -: 4 :- argues the learned counsel. In the nature of evidence which is presently available about the nature of disability and the nature of employment of the appellant, we are satisfied that the Tribunal has not committed any error in reckoning 70% as the extent of reduction of earning capacity also. 5. Though the learned counsel for the appellant raised challenge against the amount of compensation awarded under every head we are satisfied that the Tribunal has awarded compensation which is quite just and reasonable and the same does not need or warrant appellate interference. However, we find merit in the submission made by the learned counsel for the appellant that an amount of Rs.10,000/- awarded under the head of future treatment is inadequate. Artificial limb will have to be changed periodically it is pointed out. Considering all the facts and circumstances, we are satisfied that a further amount of Rs.10,000/- can be awarded under that head. 6. The above discussions lead us to the conclusion M.A.C.A. No.1392 of 2011 -: 5 :- that the appellant is entitled for a further amount of Rs.76,000/- (Rupees Seventy Six Thousand only) as shown below in addition to the amount already awarded by the Tribunal. Loss of earnings - Rs. 3,000.00 (6 x 3,000 = 18,000 minus 15,000) Reduction in earning capacity - Rs.63,000.00 (3000 x 12 x 70/100 x 15 = 3,78,000 minus 3,15,000) Future treatment - Rs.10,000.00 (20,000 – 10,000) --------------------- Total - Rs.76,000.00 ========= 7. In the result :- (A) This appeal is allowed in part. (B) The appellant is found entitled to a further amount of `76,000/- (Rupees Seventy Six 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 the M.A.C.A. No.1392 of 2011 -: 6 :- period as specified by the Tribunal in the impugned award. (D) All other directions of the Tribunal are upheld. R. BASANT, JUDGE. N.K.BALAKRISHNAN, JUDGE. Jvt