IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE A.K.BASHEER & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.Q.BARKATH ALI MONDAY, THE 22ND NOVEMBER 2010 / 1ST AGRAHAYANA 1932 MACA.No. 767 of 2007() ---------------------- OPMV.1190/2001 of MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS TRIBUNAL, VADAKARA .................... APPELLANT(S): APPELLANT/3RD RESPONDENT -------------------------------------- UNITED INDIA INSURANCE COMPANY LTD., PERUMBAVOOR NOW REPRESENTED BY ITS ASSISTANT MANAGER, REGIONAL OFFICE, "SHARANDY", HOSPITAL ROAD, KOCHI-11. BY ADV. SRI.MATHEWS JACOB, SENIOR ADVOCATE SRI.P.JACOB MATHEW RESPONDENT(S): PETITIONER ------------------------- VIJAYAN K.M., S/O KUNJU SANKARAN, PUTHANPURAYIL HOUSE, THAROPOYIL P.O., VADAKARA-673 541. ADV. SRI.C.VALSALAN FOR R1 SRI.I.K.RAJU FOR R1 SRI.K.RAKESH ROSHAN FOR R1 SMT.THUSHARA.V FOR R1 THIS MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS APPEAL HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 22/11/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: A.K.BASHEER & P.Q.BARKATH ALI, JJ. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - M.A.C.A.No.767 OF 2007 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Dated this the 22nd day of November, 2010 JUDGMENT Barkath Ali, J. Appellant is the third respondent Insurance Company in O.P.(MV)No.1190/2001 on the file of Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Vadakara. The respondent in this appeal is the claimant in the OP.. In this appeal, the appellant challenges the judgment and award of the Tribunal dated August 18, 2006 awarding a compensation of Rs. 5,00,000/- to the claimant for the loss of caused to him on account of the injuries sustained by him in a motor accident. 2. The accident happened on December 4, 2000 at about 7.45 p.m. at Perumbavoor. The claimant was returning from Sabarimala after pilgrimage to Vadakara. At Perumbavoor he stopped the car and was walking along the side of the road to the nearby hotel. At that time he was knocked down by the autorickshaw bearing Reg.No.KL7-C- 8911 driven by the second respondent. He sustained serious injuries. Alleging negligence against the second respondent, the driver of the MACA.No.767/2007 2 offending autorickshaw, the claimant filed the O.P. before the Tribunal claiming a compensation of Rs. 5,00,000/-. 3. Respondents 1 and 2, the owner and the driver of the offending autorickshaw remained absent before the Tribunal. The third respondent, the insurer of the offending autorickshaw filed a written statement admitting the policy, but denied the liability. 4. PW1 was examined and Exts.A1 to A10 and Exts.X1 to X3 were marked on the side of the claimant. No evidence was adduced by the contesting third respondent. On an appreciation of evidence, the Tribunal found that the accident occurred due to the negligence of the second respondent and awarded a compensation of Rs. 5,00,000/- with interest @ 6% per annum from the date of petition till realisation and a cost of Rs.12,500/-. The third respondent Insurance Company has now come up in appeal challenging the quantum of compensation awarded by the Tribunal. 5. Heard the counsel for the appellant/Insurance Company and the counsel for the respondent/claimant. The only question which arises for consideration is whether the compensation awarded by the MACA.No.767/2007 3 Tribunal is excessive. 6. The Tribunal awarded a total compensation of Rs. 5,00,000/-. The break-up of the compensation awarded by the Tribunal is as under : Medical expenses - Rs. 11,971.68 Disability - Rs. 4,29,976.80 Pain and suffering - Rs. 15,000/- Hospitalisation exp. - Rs. 9,000/- Transportation - Rs. 2,000/- Mental shock and inconvenience - Rs. 2,000/- Loss of income - Rs. 32,574/- 7. The claimant sustained the following injuries in the accident : Abrasion on little finger and back, contusion on the back of the skull, byfrontal contusion, right frontal accute subdural haematoma, right temporal intra cranial haemorrhage, fracture of 7th rib with pheumotharax and bleeding from nose and ear. 8. Counsel for the Insurance Company contended that the income of the claimant assessed by the Tribunal as Rs. 10,588/- for assessing compensation for the disability caused is excessive as even after the accident, he continued in service and earned pension. MACA.No.767/2007 4 9. There is force in the above contention. The Tribunal took the monthly income of the claimant as Rs.10,858/-, adopted a multiplier of 11, took the percentage of disability as 30% and awarded Rs. 4,29,976/- for the disability caused. The claimant was working as a teacher earning Rs.10,588/- per month as proved by Ext.A6 his salary certificate. But he continued in service even after the accident and earned pension. Therefore, we feel that for the purpose of assessing compensation for the disability caused, his monthly income can be reasonably taken as Rs. 5,000/-. The multiplier of 11 adopted by the Tribunal is reasonable as the claimant was aged 52 at the time of accident. Regarding the percentage of disability taken by the Tribunal as 30%, the District Medical Board has certified in Ext.P3 that claimant has no disability at present. But the State Medical Board in Ext.X3 certificate has certified that the claimant has now a permanent disability of 30%. The claimant has now frontal lob disfunction and shown behavioural disorder. He has now gradual decrease in vision as evidenced by Ext.A8 the certificate issued from Sankara Nethralaya, Chennai. Therefore, the percentage of disability as 30% as certified by MACA.No.767/2007 5 State Medical Board appears reasonable. Thus calculated for the disability caused, the claimant is entitled to a compensation of Rs. 1,98,000/-. As regards the compensation awarded under other heads, we find the same to be reasonable and therefore we are not disturbing the same. 10. In the result, the claimant/respondent is found entitled to a compensation of Rs. 2,70,546/- instead of Rs. 5,00,000/- awarded by the Tribunal. He is entitled to interest @ 7.5% per annum from the date of petition till realisation and proportionate cost. The appellant 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.767/2007 6 MACA.No.767/2007 7