IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE A.K.BASHEER & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.Q.BARKATH ALI TUESDAY, THE 20TH JULY 2010 / 29TH ASHADHA 1932 MACA.No. 1666 of 2008 ----------------------- OPMV.266/2002 of MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS TRIBUNAL, TRIVANDRUM .................... APPELLANT:3rd RESPONDENT ------------------------- NATIONAL INSURANCE COMPANY LIMITED, KOLLAM NOW REPRESENTED BY ITS ASSISTANT MANAGER, KOCHI REGIONAL OFFICE, OMANA BUILDING,M.G. ROAD, KOCHI -35. BY ADV. SRI.P.JACOB MATHEW RESPONDENT(S): APPLICANT --------------- NISITHA (MINOR), REPRESENTED BY HER MOTHER M. BEENA, W/O SYED ALI, ST.MARY'S QUARTERS,SOUTH THUMBA, VALIYAVELI P.O., THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. ADV. SRI.RAM MOHAN.G. SRI.G.P.SHINOD SRI.MANU V. THIS MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS APPEAL HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 20/07/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: A.K. BASHEER & P.Q. BARKATH ALI, JJ. ------------------------------------------------------ M.A.C.A. 1666 of 2008 ------------------------------------------------------ Dated: JULY 20, 2010 JUDGMENT Barkath Ali, J. The appellant is the 3rd respondent/Insurance company in OP (MV) 266/2002 on the file of the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Trivandrum. The claimant was a girl aged 7 and she sustained the following injuries in a motor accident which occurred on July 19, 2001 at about 4 p.m. on the side of Poundukadavu - Station Kadavu road: “abrasions on the right chest wall measuring 10 x 10 cm, abrasion on the right elbow measuring 1 x 1 cm, abrasion on right labial fossa measuring 5 x 5 cm, a crushed and degloved skin on the right thigh and leg,muscles were crushed and strapped, right knee exposed the patellar tendon.” While she was waiting for the bus on the side of the road, she was knocked own by a lorry bearing registration No.KLU 9069 driven by the 2nd respondent. Claiming a compensation of Rs.3 lakhs and alleging negligence on the part of the 2nd respondent, she, through her next friend mother, filed the O.P. under sec.166 of the Motor Vehicles Act against respondents 1 to 3, the owner, driver and insurer of the M.A.C.A. 1666 of 2008 2 offending vehicle claiming a compensation of Rs.3 lakhs. 2. Respondents 1 and 2, the owner and the driver of the offending vehicle, remained absent before the Tribunal. Only the 3rd respondent, Insurance Company, contested the matter, but admitted the policy. Exts.A1 to A10 and X1 were marked on the side of the claimant. No evidence was adduced on the side of the contesting 3rd respondent before the Tribunal. On an appreciation of evidence the Tribunal awarded a compensation of Rs.1,79,000/- with interest at the rate of 7.5% per annum from the date of petition till realisation and proportionate costs. The 3rd respondent, Insurance Company, has now come up in appeal contending that the compensation awarded by the Tribunal is excessive. 3. Heard counsel for the appellant/insurance company and the counsel for the claimant/ respondent. 4. Counsel for the appellant mainly disputed the quantum of compensation awarded for the disability caused. The Tribunal took the monthly income of the claimant as Rs.2000/-, took the multiplier as 15 as shown in the Second Schedule to the Motor Vehicles Act and took the percentage of disability as 30% as certified by the Medical Board in Ext.X1 and awarded Rs.1,08,000/- for the disability caused. The Tribunal also awarded the following compensation: M.A.C.A. 1666 of 2008 3 medical and incidental expenses Rs.2500/- transportation 2500/- extra nourishment 2500/- bystander's expenses 3000/- damage to clothing 250/- pain and suffering 25000/- loss of amenities 35000/- Taking into consideration the nature of the injuries sustained by the claimant and the disability caused to her and her tender age, we feel that the compensation awarded by the Tribunal is just and reasonable and not excessive. That being so, we find no merit in this appeal and the same has to be dismissed. In the result the appeal is dismissed. No costs. A.K. BASHEER, JUDGE P.Q. BARKATH ALI, JUDGE mt/-