IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE J.B.KOSHY & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE THOMAS P.JOSEPH THURSDAY, THE 4TH DECEMBER 2008 / 13TH AGRAHAYANA 1930 MACA.No. 287 of 2003() ---------------------- OPMV.113/1997 of MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS TRIBUNAL, THALASSERY .................... APPELLANT(S): APPELLANT/PETITIONER ---------------------------------- RAFEEQUE, S/O.HAMZA, PUTHIYAPURAYIL HOUSE, PAYAM AMSOM, KOLIKKADAVU P.O. BY ADV. SRI.GRASHIOUS KURIAKOSE RESPONDENT(S): RESPONDENTS -------------------------- 1. M.K.SAJEEVKUMAR, S/O.GOVINDAN, SHAILAJA NIVAS, THILLENKERY P.O., ULIYIL (VIA). 2. T.P.ASSOTTY, PALAKKATT HOUSE, P.O.PINARAYI, KUTHUPARAMBA (VIA). 3. NEW INDIA ASSURANCE CO.LTD., KANNUR. ADV. SRI.M.RAJAGOPALAN FOR R3 SRI.RAJIT FOR R3 THIS MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS APPEAL HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 04/12/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: J.B.KOSHY & THOMAS P. JOSEPH, JJ. -------------------------------------- M.A.C.A.No.287 of 2003 -------------------------------------- Dated this the 4th day of December, 2008. JUDGMENT Thomas P.Joseph, J. Appellant, a bus cleaner by occupation suffered serious injuries in a motor accident at the age of 22 years on 20.2.1996. He was travelling in the bus driven by the first respondent. He alleged that on account of rash and negligent driving of the first respondent, he was thrown out from the bus and suffered injuries. He claimed compensation from the respondents. Tribunal found that accident occurred due to the rashness and negligence of the first respondent and allowed the appellant to realise Rs.1,11,000/- as compensation. Being aggrieved by the quantum of compensation awarded, appellant has preferred this appeal. 2. Heard counsel for the appellant and contesting respondent. 3. Point for consideration is whether appellant is entitled to get enhanced compensation? 4. Perused the relevant records. MACA No.287/2003 2 5. The point. Appellant claimed that he was earning Rs.3,000/- per month. However, no supporting evidence was produced. Tribunal therefore, fixed Rs.1,500/- as the monthly income. Though, counsel contended that monthly income is low, considering the age of the appellant at the time of accident, the occupation stated by him and also considering the fact that no supporting evidence was produced to prove the income, we find no reason to interfere with the monthly income fixed by the Tribunal. 6. Appellant suffered serious injuries in the accident. He underwent inpatient treatment for a total of 94 days at AKG Hospital, Kannur and Kasturba Medical College Hospital, Manipal as proved by Exts.X1 and X2, respectively. CT scan investigation revealed that appellant suffered frontal hemorrhagic contusion with acute SDH., ventricles squashed and there was fracture of right occipital bone. He was subjected to left fronto-temporal craniotomy, frontal lobotomy and bony decompression. Brain was seen bulging and so duroplasty was done. Ext.A4 is the treatment certificate issued from the Kasturba Medical College Hospital. There also it is stated that appellant suffered head injury with left frontal acute subdural hematoma and frontal contusion with diffuse brain oexema. As per Ext.A5, appellant had weakness of the right side, was not able MACA No.287/2003 3 to talk properly and open the eye properly. It is stated in Ext.A5 that the bone defect persisted for which appellant was advised cranioplasty. Tribunal observed that even as on 30.8.1998, the Medical Officer who issued Ext.A5 could not assess permanent disability or percentage of disability of the appellant as according to the Medical Officer, it could be assessed and a definite opinion given only after a period of five years during which appellant’s epileptic complaint could be controlled. Tribunal did not assess compensation for disability and loss of earning power. Instead, Rs.30,000/- was awarded as compensation on that count. 7. On the request of the appellant, he was referred to the Medical Board by this Court as per order dated 4.9.2008. The Medical Board attached to the Government Medical College, Calicut examined the appellant and has forwarded the certificate. As per that certificate, appellant had frontal lob contusion on the left side. He has right side weakness, deformity in speaking and post traumatic seizure-disorder. The percentage of permanent disability due to injury is certified as 60%. The certificate shows that he was examined by specialists in orthopedics and neurology. In the light of the injuries suffered by the appellant as stated by the Tribunal also in the award under challenge, we find no reason to discard the permanent disability certified by the Medical Board. Hence, we accept the certificate issued by the Medical Board. Since the MACA No.287/2003 4 appellant was aged only 22 years at the time of accident, the proper multiplier to be adopted is ‘17’. That brings the compensation payable for disability and loss of earning power to Rs.1,83,600/- [(Rs.1,500x12x17x60)/100], and less the sum of Rs.30,000/- already awarded for disability, additional compensation payable on that count is Rs.1,53,600/-. 7. Though it is contended by learned counsel that the compensation awarded on other counts are also low, we are unable to accept that contention considering the amount awarded on those counts and the total amount of compensation to which the appellant is found entitled. Thus, the appellant is entitled to get Rs.1,53,600/- as additional compensation which will carry interest at the rate of 7.5% per annum from the date of application till realization. Resultantly, this appeal is allowed in part. Over and above the compensation awarded by the Tribunal, appellant is allowed to realize Rs.1,53,600/- (Rupees One lakh, fiftythree thousand and six hundred only) by way of additional compensation with 7.5% interest per annum from the date of application till realization from respondents 1 to 3, jointly and severally. Third respondent being the insurer of the offending vehicle is directed to deposit that amount in the Tribunal. On such deposit, appellant is permitted to withdraw Rs.50,000/- (Rupees Fifty thousand only) and the rest of the amount will remain in fixed deposit in a nationalized bank in the name of the appellant for two years MACA No.287/2003 5 with liberty to withdraw the monthly interest that accrues. If any further amount is required for the treatment of appellant, he can approach the Tribunal for permission to withdraw such amount from the fixed deposit. J.B.KOSHY, JUDGE. THOMAS P.JOSEPH, JUDGE. cks MACA No.287/2003 6 J.B.Koshy & Thomas P.Joseph, JJ. M.A.C.A.No.287 of 2003 JUDGMENT 4th December, 2008