IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE M.N.KRISHNAN THURSDAY, THE 11TH FEBRUARY 2010 / 22ND MAGHA 1931 MACA.No. 1573 of 2008() ------------------------------------ OPMV.570/2006 of MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS TRIBUNAL, PERUMBAVOOR .................... APPELLANT(S): APPELLANT/PETITIONER:- ------------------------------------ UNNI C.P.,S/O PAULOSE, CHITTOPARAMBIL HOUSE, MANKUZHI KARA EDAVOOR P.O. BY ADVS.MR.M.SHAJU PURUSHOTHAMAN MR. K.S. RAJESH RESPONDENT(S): ------------------------ 1. S.SANTHOSAN LAL, S/O SUGATHAN NKARATH HOUSE, AVALOKUNNU P.O., ARYAD SOUTH , ALAPPUZHA. 2. PREMKUMAR, S/O SADANANDAN KEZHAKAVALIYIL HOUSE ARYAD DESOM KOMALAPURAM, ALAPPUZHA, CHANGALEEN P.O., MANNARKKAD (OWNER). 3. THE NEW INDIA INSURANCE CO.LTD., NEAR TOWN HALL, ALAPPUZHA,. 4. BAJAJ ALIANCE GENERAL INSURANCE CO.LTD., M.G. ROAD, ELAMKULAM. R3 BY ADVS.MR.P.G.GANAPPAN R4 BY MR.K.B.RAMANAND THIS MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS APPEAL HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 11/02/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: tss M.N. KRISHNAN, J. = = = = = = = = = = = = = = M.A.C.A. NO. 1573 OF 2008 = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = Dated this the 11h day of February, 2010. J U D G M E N T This appeal is preferred against the award of the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Perumbavoor in O.P.(MV)570/06. The claimant, a 30 year old practicing advocate sustained injuries in a road accident while he was driving a car and the Tribunal after finding him 25% negligent for the accident awarded a compensation of Rs.22,400/- and it is against that decision the claimant has come up in appeal for enhancement. 2. Heard the learned counsel for the appellant as well as the insurance company. Learned counsel for the appellant would contend the finding on the contributory negligence is not supported by materials. I had perused the award. It is seen that the claimant was riding a car and it had collided with another car in a road which was having a total width of 4 mtrs. The accident as per the scene mahazar had taken place exactly almost on the middle of the road which would M.A.C.A. 1573 OF 2008 -:2:- indicate that it was a head on collision on the middle of the road. When it is a head on collision the Apex Court has held that it will be a case of composite negligence where the negligence has to be apportioned. The Tribunal has only apportioned the negligence on the appellant at 25% which cannot be said to be on the higher side. Therefore it does not require any interference. 3. Now the next is regarding the quantum. The Tribunal did not accept the income of the Advocate though a certificate was issued by his senior. The Tribunal found that no documents are produced to prove the same and therefore it fixed his income at Rs.3,000/-. I cannot find fault with the Tribunal in the absence of concrete evidence to prove it otherwise. But the injuries sustained are really difficult for a lawyer for some point of time for the reason he had a split injury on the tongue and there was a transverse lacerated wound on the lip and tenderness over the chest. After initial treatment in a local hospital called L.F. hospital he was referred to the Medical Centre, Ernakulam which did show M.A.C.A. 1573 OF 2008 -:3:- that he had through and through laceration on anterior tongue and chin etc. He was discharged on 1.12.05, i.e. after a period of 5 days. Certainly it would have taken a very long time for a through and through injury to come back to normalcy. Certainly it would have affected his profession as well and it would have also caused agonizing pain for the reason that even when water touches that part of the body it would have caused him pain. So that would have caused him loss of amenities for some length of time. Taking into consideration all those aspects I increase the loss of earnings compensation by one month, i.e. Rs.3,000/-, for pain and sufferings by Rs.4,000/- and also for loss of amenities by Rs.2,000/- making it an additional compensation of Rs.9,000/-. When it is so the total compensation would come to Rs.36,200/- of which the claimant is entitled to 75% that would come to Rs.27,150/-. Since Rs.20,400/- is already awarded the claimant will be entitled to an additional compensation of Rs.6,750/-. M.A.C.A. 1573 OF 2008 -:4:- In the result the MACA is partly allowed and the claimant is awarded an additional compensation of Rs.6,750/- with 7.5% interest on the said sum from the date of petition till realisation and the insurance company is directed to deposit the same within a period of sixty days from the date of receipt of a copy of the judgment. M.N. KRISHNAN, JUDGE. ul/-