IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE J.B.KOSHY & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.N.RAVINDRAN TUESDAY, THE 10TH JUNE 2008 / 20TH JYAISHTA 1930 MFA.No. 379 of 2003(C) --------------------------------- OPMV.3004/1996 of MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS TRIBUNAL, ERNAKULAM .................... APPELLANT: PETITIONER IN OP (M.V) NO.3004/96 OF MACT, EKM ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- SMT.P.K.THULASI, AGED 47, W/O.MR.T.V.PURUSHOTHAMAN, POONTHODATH HOUSE, EROOR NORTH POST, NADAMA VILLAGE, TRIPUNITHURA, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.T.K.RADHAKRISHNAN RESPONDENTS/ RESPONDENTS IN O.P(MV) 3004/96 OF M.A.C.T. EKM ----------------------------------------------------------- 1. GEORGE KURIAN, S/O.SRI.KURIAN, KARTHEDATHU HOUSE, NEAR KESAVAN PADY BUS STOP, THIRUVAMKULAM. 2. JOSEPH. P.J., S/O.SRI.OUSEPH, KURUPPASSERRY HOUSE, NADAMA EAST, TRIPUNITHURA. 3. UNITED INDIA INSURANCE CO.LTD., LAYAM ROAD, TRIPUNITHURA (BRANCH). BY ADV. SRI.B.MOHANLAL - R4 SMT.MEREENA JOSEPH - R4 SRI.P.V.JYOTHI PRASAD - R3 THIS MISC. FIRST APPEAL HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 10/06/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: J.B.KOSHY & P.N.RAVINDRAN, JJ. -------------------------------------- M.F.A.No.379 OF 2003 ------------------------------------- Dated 10th June, 2008 JUDGMENT Koshy,J . Building of the appellant was damaged in an accident occurred on 26.7.1996. A bus bearing registration No.KRO 2829 overtook another bus and consequently it hit against a lorry and went off side and hit against the building of the appellant. Tribunal found that the accident occurred due to the negligence of the second respondent driver of the bus KRO 2829 owned by the first respondent and insured by the third respondent. Against a claim of Rs.8,02,000/=, Tribunal awarded only Rs.25,000/=. Dispute is only regarding the quantum of compensation granted for the damages. Ext.A6 is the photocopy of the scene mahazar. Ext.A3 is the photographs (9 Nos.) of place of occurrence. According to the appellant, her two storied building has to be re-built and Ext.A1 is the estimate of construction of the new building issued by the Architects Groups, Ernakulam. It was proved by the architect (PW2). The Tribunal found that estimate given is for construction of a new building and actually a construction is not necessary. Only repair has to be done so as to make the building safe and back to the old condition. The certificate issued by the architect MFA.379/2003 2 reads as follows: “Certified that the residence of Smt.P.K.Thulasi, Poonthodath, Eroor, Thrippoonithura, which was hit by a running bus had been damaged extensively. Though the physical appearance of the structure remain intact except for the corner directly hit by the bus, the vertical cracks gives an implication of the gravity of shake and vibration he structure had suffered. These cracks on the wall and floor are likely to expand giving rise to the collapse of the roof. The accient has weakend and reduced the life of the structure. Any cosmetic repair of the damage will be superficial and will not set the structure into original condition before the accident. The structure is not 100% fit for human habitation now as it was before the accident.” RW1, Surveyor of the insurance company was examined to prove that he went for inspecting the building and making survey, but, he was not allowed to enter into the house by the wife of the claimant. According to the appellant, identity was not proved and he came without any previous notice. Anyway, surveyor of the insurance company did not make any survey. There was a severe crack in the building, but, even if it is a severe crack, it can be repaired by using sufficient safeguards as per the instructions of qualified engineers, but, Rs.25,000/= awarded is too meagre. Considering the cost of MFA.379/2003 3 materials in 1996 and all other details, at least Rs.50,000/= ought to have been granted, as it is a two storied building. Tribunal has awarded Rs.25,000/= against the claim of Rs.8,02,000/=. The building has to be restored to its original position. Thus, the additional amount of Rs.25,000/= should be deposited by the third respondent Inurance company with 7.5% interest from the date of application till its deposit, over and above the decreed amount by the Tribunal. The appeal is allowed in part. J.B.KOSHY JUDGE P.N.RAVINDRAN JUDGE tks