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 25TH MAY 2010 / 4TH JYAISHTA 1932 MACA.No. 825 of 2005() ---------------------- OPMV.412/2002 of MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS TRIBUNAL, THODUPUZHA .................... APPELLANT/PETITIONER: ----------------------------------- ANOOP JOSE, S/O. JOSE, EDATTU HOUSE, PLANTATION BHAGAM, KARIMKUNNAM KARA, KARIMKUNNAM VILLAGE. BY ADV. SRI.MATHEW JOHN (K) SRI.SUJESH MENON V.B. RESPONDENT(S): RESPONDENTS 1 TO 3: ---------------------------------- 1. JOY JOSEPH, S/O. JOSEPH, KUZHIPPILLIL HOUSE, KOLANI P.O., KOLANI KARA, THODUPUZHA. 2. THE ORIENTAL INSURANCE CO. LTD., REPRESENTED BY ITS BRANCH MANAGER, JYOTHI SUPER BAZAR, THODUPUZHA. 3. ROBIN J.MATHEW, S/O. JOSE, THERUVAMKUNNEL HOUSE, PLANTATION BHAGAM, KARIMKUNNAM KARA AND VILLAGE. ADV. SRI.GEORGE CHERIAN (THIRUVALLA) FOR R2 THIS MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS APPEAL HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 25/05/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: A.K.BASHEER & P.Q.BARKATH ALI, JJ. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - M.A.C.A.No.825 OF 2005 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Dated this the 25th day of May, 2010 JUDGMENT Barkath Ali, J. In this appeal under Section 173 of Motor Vehicles Act, the claimant in O.P.(MV)No.412/2002 of Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Thodupuzha challenges the judgment and award of the Tribunal dated December 22, 2004 awarding a compensation of Rs. 1,29,583/- for the loss caused to him on account of the injuries sustained in a motor accident. 2. The facts leading to this appeal in brief are these : The claimant was aged 22 and was working in a Rubber Factory earning Rs. 3,000/- per month, according to him. On November 24, 2001, the claimant was riding his scooter bearing Reg.No.KL6.A/8066. When he reached at Nadukkandam, it collided head on with another scooter bearing Reg.No.KL.6.A/269 ridden by the first respondent. Claimant sustained very serious injuries. According to the claimant, accident occurred due to the negligence on the part of the first MACA.No.825/2005 2 respondent, the rider of the other scooter. First respondent as the rider, second respondent as the owner and third respondent as the insurer of the said scooter bearing Reg.No.KL6.A/269 are jointly and severally liable to pay compensation to the claimant. Respondents 4 and 5 are the owner and insurer of the scooter of the claimant. Claimant claimed a compensation of Rs. 8 lakhs. 3. Respondents 1 and 3, the rider and the owner of the offending scooter remained absent and were set ex parte by the Tribunal. The second respondent the insurer of the said scooter filed a written statement admitting the accident, but contending that the accident occurred due to the negligence on the part of the claimant. The fourth respondent, the owner of the scooter of the claimant remained absent before the Tribunal. The fifth respondent, the insurer of the said scooter filed a written statement admitting the accident and further contending that the accident occurred due to the negligence on the part of the first respondent. 4. Exts.A1 to A13 were marked on the side of the claimant before the Tribunal. On the side of the respondents, Ext.B1 was MACA.No.825/2005 3 marked. The Tribunal on an appreciation of evidence found that the accident occurred due to the rash and negligent riding of the offending scooter by first respondent and awarded a compensation of Rs. 1,29,583/- against respondents 1 to 3 with interest @ 6% per annum from the date of petition till realisation and proportionate cost. The claimant has now come up in appeal challenging the quantum of compensation awarded by the Tribunal. 5. Heard the counsel for the appellant/claimant and the counsel for the Insurance Company. 6. The accident is not disputed. The finding of the Tribunal that the accident occurred due to the negligence on the part of the first respondent is not challenged in this appeal. Therefore, the only question which arises for consideration is whether the claimant is entitled to any enhanced compensation. 7. The claimant sustained the following injuries as revealed from Ext.A5, the copy of the wound certificate, Ext.A7, the discharge certificate and Ext.A9, the certificate issued from the hospital. 1. Right frontal intracerebral Haemorrhage. MACA.No.825/2005 4 2. Left Occipetal Contusion. 3. Diffuse subarachnoid Haemorrhage. 4. Pneumocophalus. 5. Fracture of left occipetal bone. 6. Fracture of 5th metatarsel right foot. 8. The Tribunal awarded a total compensation of Rs.1,29,583/-. The break up of the compensation awarded is as under : Loss of earning - Rs. 12,000/- Transportation expenses - Rs. 5,500/- Damage to clothing - Rs. 250/- Extra nourishment - Rs. 1,000/- Bystander expenses - Rs. 2,800/- Medical bills - Rs. 83,033/- Pain and suffering - Rs. 25,000/- --------------------- Total - Rs.1,29,583/- =========== 9. Counsel for the claimant mainly sought enhancement of the compensation for the disability caused. The Tribunal did not award any compensation for the disability caused as no certificate of disability was produced by the claimant before the Tribunal. The MACA.No.825/2005 5 counsel for the claimant produced a copy of the certificate issued by Dr.G.Sreekumar Ext.A9 and copy of the discharge summary issued from the Mission Hospital, Kolenchery. Ext.A9 and A7 show that claimant has sustained serious injuries. In Ext.A9 the doctor has certified that the claimant carries high risk of posttraumatic seizures. All these facts show that claimant has suffered some disability due to the injuries sustained. As no percentage of disability is mentioned in Ext.A9, we feel that a compensation of Rs. 50,000/- would be reasonable for the disability caused. 10. For loss of amenities and enjoyment of life also, no compensation was awarded by the Tribunal. Taking into account the nature of the injury sustained, we feel that a compensation of Rs. 15,000/- would be reasonable for the loss of amenities and enjoyment of life. As regards the compensation awarded under other heads, we find the same to be reasonable and therefore are not disturbing the same. 11. In the result, the claimant is entitled to an additional compensation of Rs.65,000/-. He is entitled to interest @ 7.5% per MACA.No.825/2005 6 annum from the date of petition till realisation for the enhanced compensation as well as for the compensation already awarded by the Tribunal. He is also entitled to proportionate cost. The third respondent being the insurer of the offending vehicle shall deposit the amount before the Tribunal within two months from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment. The award of the Tribunal is modified to the above extent. The Appeal is disposed of as found above. A.K.BASHEER, JUDGE P.Q.BARKATH ALI, JUDGE sv. MACA.No.825/2005 7