IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE A.K.BASHEER & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.Q.BARKATH ALI THURSDAY, THE 8TH APRIL 2010 / 18TH CHAITHRA 1932 MACA.No. 737 of 2003 ---------------------- OPMV.824/1998 of MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS TRIBUNAL, MANJERI .................... APPELLANT/PETITIONER ---------------------------------- BADARUDHEEN 15 YEARS (MINOR), REPRESENTED BY FATHER GUARDIAN, MATUMMAL MUHAMMED, MATTUMMAL HOUSE, P.O.A.R.NAGAR, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.K.M.SATHYANATHA MENON RESPONDENT(S): RESPONDENTS -------------------------- 1. P.RAVI S/O. VELAYUDHAN, POOLAKKAL HOUSE, OORAKAM P.O., DRIVER. 2. K.MOHAMMED HAJI S/O. AHAMMEDKUTTY, KARUVEPPIL HOUSE, P.O.VENARA, OWNER. 3. NEW INDIA ASSURANCE CO.LTD., MALAPPURAM DISTRICT. ADV. SRI.P.K.BEHANAN FOR R2 SRI.SAM THOMAS.K FOR R2 SMT.M.HEMALATHA FOR R3 THIS MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS APPEAL HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 08/04/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: A.K.BASHEER & P.Q. BARKATH ALI, JJ. =~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~==~=~=~= M.A.C.A. No. 737 of 2003 =~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~==~=~=~= Dated this the 8th day of April, 2010 JUDGMENT Barkath Ali, J: In this appeal under section 173 of the Motor Vehicles Act claimant in O.P.(MV) No.824 of 1998 of the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Manjeri challenges the judgment and award of the Tribunal dated February 17, 2003, awarding a compensation of Rs.67,800/- for the loss caused to the claimant, on account of the injury sustained by him in a motor accident. 2. The facts leading to this appeal, in brief, are these:- The claimant is a boy, aged 11 at the time of the accident. On June 1, 1997 at about 12.30 p.m while the claimant was walking along the side of Kolappuram – Kakkad public road, he was knocked down by a jeep bearing registration No.KL-10/2886, driven by the first respondent. According to the claimant, the accident occurred due to the rash and negligent driving of the MACA 737/2003 2 offending jeep by the first respondent. The first respondent as the driver, the second respondent as the owner and third respondent as the insurer of the offending jeep are jointly and severely liable to pay the compensation to the claimant. 3. Respondents 1 and 2, the driver and owner of the offending jeep, remained absent and were set ex parte by the Tribunal. The third respondent, insurer of the offending jeep, filed a written statement, admitting the policy. 4. Exts. A1 to A3 were marked on the side of the claimant. No evidence was adduced by the third respondent. The Tribunal, on an appreciation of the evidence, awarded a compensation of Rs.67,800/- with interest at the rate of 9% p.a. from the date of petition till realization. The claimant has come up in appeal, challenging the quantum of compensation awarded by the Tribunal. 5. Heard the learned counsel for the claimant and learned 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 MACA 737/2003 3 the part of the first respondent is not seriously challenged in this appeal. Therefore, the only question which arises for consideration is whether the claimant is entitled to any enhanced compensation. 7. The Tribunal awarded a total compensation of Rs.67,800/-. Break up of the compensation awarded is as under:- Transport to hospital : Rs.1,000/- Extra nourishment : Rs.2,000/- Damage to clothing : Rs.300/- Medical expenses : Rs.5,000/- By-stander’s expenses : Rs.2,000/- Pain and suffering : Rs.15,000/- Loss of studies : Rs.2,000/- and enjoyment of life. Disability caused : Rs.40,500/- ------------------ Total : Rs.67,800/- ======= 8. The claimant sustained the following injuries, as revealed from Ext.A2 copy of the wound certificate:- 1) Lacerated wound extending to bone and fracture of bone - dura seen through that 10x2x1 cms., left frontal parietal 5 cms. along MACA 737/2003 4 ear. 2) Fracture left femur. 3) Abrasion 3 x 2 cm. left shoulder. 4) Abrasion below right eye 3 x 2 cm. X-ray examination revealed compound depressed fracture. Ext.X1 medical certificate issued by the Medical Board, District Hospital, Manjeri showed that the claimant suffered deformity of left middle thigh and fracture dislocation of left femur. He had seizuness. C.T. Scan showed communal fracture with slight depression of left upper frontal and parietal bones with extensive haemorrhagic contusion underlying brain parenchyma. Left tempero parietal cramotony was done and skull elevated. In Ext.X1 it is stated that the claimant has residual hemiparesis right and left knee ORM terminal flexision restricted. There was ¾” shortening (L) thigh and disability was assessed at 18. 9. The Tribunal took the notional income as Rs.15,.000/- per annum, adopted multiplier of 15 and awarded Rs.40,500/- for the loss of dependency. Taking into account the nature of MACA 737/2003 5 the injuries sustained and the fact that the claimant was only a student, aged 11, we feel that compensation awarded for loss of dependency is just and reasonable. Therefore, the claimant is not entitled to any enhanced compensation under this head. 10. The Tribunal awarded Rs.15,000/- for pain and suffering endured, which appears to be very low. Having regard to the nature of the injury sustained and the period of treatment the claimant has undergone, we feel that compensation of Rs.25,000/- would be reasonable on this count. Thus, on this count, the claimant is entitled to an additional compensation of Rs.10,000/-. 11. Learned counsel for the appellant pointed out that for loss of amenities and enjoyment in life no compensation was awarded. We find force in the above contention. Taking into consideration the nature of the injury sustained, we feel that a compensation of Rs.25,000/- for loss of amenities and enjoyment in life and Rs.25,000/- for loss of expectation of life would be reasonable. As regards the compensation awarded MACA 737/2003 6 under other heads, we find the same to be reasonable and therefore, we are not disturbing the same. 12. In the result, the claimant is entitled to an additional compensation of Rs.60,000/-. He is entitled to interest @ 9% per annum, as ordered by the Tribunal, from the date of petition till realization and proportionate costs. The third respondent, being the insurer of the offending vehicle shall deposit the amount within two months from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment with notice to the claimant. The claimant has become major now. Therefore, he is entitled to withdraw the entire compensation awarded. 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. mn