IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE J.B.KOSHY & THE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE K.HEMA MONDAY, THE 4TH FEBRUARY 2008 / 15TH MAGHA 1929 MACA.No. 348 of 2006 ------------------------------- OPMV.340/2001 OF MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS TRIBUNAL, MANJERI .................... APPELLANT/CLAIMANT. ---------------------------------- ABDURAHIMAN, S/O.LATE ABBAS, MALIYEKKAL HOUSE, P.O.IRIVETTY, KAVANOOR, NOW RESIDING AT PERUVAKUNDU, ANAKATHIL, PATHAPIRIYAM, EDAVANNA, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.BABU S. NAIR RESPONDENTS: 3RD RESPONDENT. --------------------------------------------------- THE ORIENTAL INSURANCE CO.LTD., BRANCH OFFICE, JASEELA COMPLEX, NILAMBUR ROAD, MANJERI, REPRESENTED THROUGH ITS BRANCH MANAGER. BY ADV. SRI.A.R.GEORGE THIS MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS APPEAL HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 04/02/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: J.B.KOSHY & K.HEMA, JJ. -------------------------------------- M.A.C.A.No.348 OF 2006 ------------------------------------- Dated 4th February, 2008 JUDGMENT Koshy,J . Appellant/claimant met with an accident at the age of 28. As a result of the accident he sustained the following injuries: “1) Subdural Haematoma right temporal area. 2) Head injury. 3) Tenden injuries of extensor pollicis longus. 4) Extending indicis extendins digitorum to middle Index finger (R). 5) Tender and muscle injury repaired (muscle suturing). 6) Lacerated wound over dorsum of right hand and right leg. 7) Crush injury extending tendon or right Index finger and dorsum of hand. 8) Lacerated wound over lateral aspect of right leg, suturing done, arm slab given, 9) Drooping of right eyelid. 10) Lod odema and cerymosin present in right uplid. 11) Abrasion over the right eye brow. 12) Sub-conjunctival humerage on the temporal area. 13) Optima Nerve injury right eye.” Tribunal accepted the disability certificate assessing his disability as 30%, but, awarded only Rs.93,614/= against a claim of Rs.5,00,000/=. According to the appellant, he was doing hotel business and getting MACA.348/2006 2 Rs.4,500/= per month. However, no evidence was produced to show that he was doing hotel business. Tribunal has taken only Rs.1,250/= per month (Rs.15,000/= per year) as the notional income. Even for a child below three years, the notional income fixed as per the second schedule is Rs.15,000/=. Here, the injured was aged 28 and he was not a non-earning person even though income from the hotel business was not proved. The accident occurred on 18.7.2000. The second schedule was framed in 1994. Taking all circumstances, we fix his monthly income as Rs.2,000/= per month. Tribunal has accepted 30% disability and also taken 18 as the multiplier taking guidance from the second schedule. Multiplier needs no enhancement. Considering Rs.2,000/= as the monthly income, total compensation payable for 30% disability will be Rs.1,29,600/= (2,000 x 12 x 30 x 18). Tribunal has awarded only Rs.81,000/= 100 for disability and loss of earning power and for other difficulties caused due to the injuries. Hence, he is entitled to an additional amount of Rs.48,600/= under this head. Tribunal did not award any amouant for pain and suffering. Considering the injuries, we are of the opinion that at least Rs.10,000/= ought to have been awarded for pain and suffering. Tribunal found that he was unable to do work for six months, for the period under treatment, and Rs.7,500/= was awarded taking Rs.1,250/= as monthly income. Since we have taken MACA.348/2006 3 monthly income as Rs.2,000/=, he is entitled to an additional amount of Rs.4,500/= under that head. It is submitted that for transport to hospital only Rs.1,000/= was granted. He was to be taken from the place to the hospital and for following treatment also travel has to be conducted in special conveyance. He was in the hospital for 16 days. Only Rs.2,614/= awarded for medical expenses which is covered by actual bills. There will be many expenses which are not covered by the bills. Therefore, for transportation and additional medical expenses we award Rs.900/=. Thus, the appellant is entitled to Rs.64,000/= more than that was awarded by the Tribunal. The above amount should be deposited by the third respondent insurance company with 7.5% interest from the date of application till its deposit, over and above the amount decreed by the Tribunal. On deposit of the amount, the appellant is allowed to withdraw the same. The appeal is partly allowed. J.B.KOSHY JUDGE K.HEMA JUDGE tks