IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.R.RAMAN & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.R.RAMACHANDRA MENON MONDAY, THE 23RD NOVEMBER 2009 / 2ND AGRAHAYANA 1931 MACA.No. 2055 of 2007(G) ------------------------------ OPMV.1698/1999 of ADDL.MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS TRIBUNAL, ERNAKULAM APPELLANT(S): APPELLANT/PETITIONER K.K.ALIKUNJU, AGED 58 YEARS, SON OF KOCHUNNI, KUTTIMAKKAL HOUSE, OPP. STANDARD POTTERIES, KAINTIKKARA, MUPPATHADOM P.O., ALWAYE-2. BY ADV. MR.ANIL S.RAJ MS.K.N.RAJANI MS.MANJUSHA MOHANDAS MS.ANILA PETER RESPONDENT(S): RESPONDENTS ------------------------------------ 1. V.S.SAINABHA, W/O T.B.KUNJUMUHAMMED, H.NO.1/382, PALOOPALLATH HOUSE, KUNJUNNIKKARA, ULIYANNOOR P.O., ALUVA. 2. JOSHY, S/O NARAYANAN, CHAKKANALIL HOUSE, WEST OF JUNCTION, SREEMOOLANAGARAM, CHOWARA VILLAGE, ALUVA TALUK. 3. THE ORIENTAL INSURANCE COMPANY LTD., REGIONAL OFFICE, COCHIN-682035. AR3 BY ADV. MR.P.JAYASANKAR THIS MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS APPEAL HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 23/11/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: P.R.RAMAN & P.R.RAMACHANDRA MENON, JJ - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - M.A.C.A. No. 2055 of 2007 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Dated this the 23rd day of NOVEMBER, 2009 J U D G M E N T P.R.RAMACHANDRA MENON, J 1. Challenge in this appeal is in respect of the inadequacy of the compensation awarded by the Motor Accidents Claim Tribunal, Ernakulam in O.P.(MV) No.1697/1999. 2. Appellant/claimant, while travelling as a passenger in the bus bearing No.KL-7H 9099, sustained serious injuries when the bus went out of control, crossing the median and hit against a building, which led to the claim petition preferred before the Tribunal. 3. First respondent/owner of the bus and the second respondent/driver did not choose to contest the matter, despite the service of notice. In the said circumstance, the third respondent/insurer was permitted to have wider defence on allowing the petition filed under Section 170 of M.A.C.A. No. 2055 of 2007 2 the Motor Vehicles Act. The evidence consists of Ext.A1 to A9 marked on the side of the claimant and Ext.B1 copy of the Policy produced on the part of the third respondent, while no oral evidence was adduced by either side. After appreciation of the facts and figures, the Tribunal held that the accident was because of the rash and negligent driving by the second respondent and hence that the claimant was liable to be compensated in respect of the injuries sustained. 4. After going through the available evidence on record, the Tribunal awarded various amounts under the permissible heads; such as Rs.16,500/- towards the permanent disability, Rs.20,000/- towards the pain and suffering, Rs.1,000/- towards the transportation to hospital, Rs.2,500/- towards the extra nourishment and bystander's expenses, Rs.3,750/- towards the loss of earning for three months, Rs.10,000/- towards loss of amenities and a further sum of Rs.42,889/- towards medical expenses, thus granting a total sum of Rs.96,631/- (in place of the actual figure of M.A.C.A. No. 2055 of 2007 3 Rs.96,639/-) which was directed to be satisfied by the insurer with interest @7% per annum from the date of the petition till the date of payment. 5. The learned counsel for the appellant submits that the amounts awarded by the Tribunal are very much on the lower side and it requires to be enhanced to a substantial extent, in view of the nature of injuries sustained and the consequences resulted. Learned counsel however concedes that no oral evidence was adduced from the part of the claimant to substantiate the position in a better manner. However, taking note of the injuries sustained, the amount of medical expenses incurred, different spells of hospitalisation and such other relevant aspects as brought to light, we find that the compensation awarded by the Tribunal under some heads requires some modification. 6. It is seen that the permanent disability of appellant/claimant has been certified as 10% as shown in Ext.A8 disability certificate issued by the Medical Board. It M.A.C.A. No. 2055 of 2007 4 is seen that the Tribunal has awarded a sum of Rs.16,500/- under this head, presumably taking the notional income of the claimant at Rs.1,250/- per month as a Coolie/worker. We find it fit and proper to have the same reworked, reckoning the monthly income at least as Rs.1,750/- and on recalculation of the figures reckoning the certified permanent disability of 10%, and adopting the multiplier of '11' (based on the age of the claimant as 50 years), the appellant is found entitled to get a further sum of Rs.6,600/- as the balance compensation payable under this head. We find that the Tribunal has awarded only a sum of Rs.1,000/- towards the transportation expenses. Considering the facts and figures as to the period of hospitalisation and the treatment undergone in different hospitals, we find that a further sum of Rs.2,000/- can be awarded under this head as well. Considering the extent of injuries and also the consequences resulted, a further sum of Rs.1,000/- is awarded towards the loss of amenities and enjoyment of life. M.A.C.A. No. 2055 of 2007 5 In view of the fact that we have reworked the compensation for the permanent disability refixing the monthly income as Rs.1,750/-, the appellant/claimant is eligible to get a further sum of Rs.1,500/- towards loss of earning for three months. 7. In the result, the appellant is hereby awarded a further sum of Rs.11,100/- as the balance compensation payable in respect of the injuries sustained by him in the accident occurred on 1/6/1999. The said amount shall be deposited by the third respondent/insurer, with interest @7% per annum from the date of the petition, till the date of payment, as expeditiously as possible, at any rate within two months from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment. Appeal is allowed in part. No cost. P.R.RAMAN, JUDGE P.R. RAMACHANDRA MENON, JUDGE nl