IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE M.N.KRISHNAN TUESDAY, THE 29TH JUNE 2010 / 8TH ASHADHA 1932 MACA.No. 2465 of 2009() ----------------------- OPMV.260/2005 of MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS TRIBUNAL, KASARAGOD .................... APPELLANT(S)/PETITIONER: :- ----------------------------------------- ABDULLA, S/O.AHAMMED, POINACHI CHERUKARA HOUSE, THEKKIL P.O., KASARGOD DISTRICT. BY ADV. MR.K.V.SOHAN SMT.SREEJA SOHAN.K. MR.GEORGE JOSEPH PULIMOOTTIL MR.VINEETH KURIAKOSE RESPONDENT(S)/RESPONDENTS :- ------------------------------------------------ 1. K.RAJAN, S/O.KUNHAMBU NAIR.K., KOLOTTU HOUSE, P.O.KOLATHUR, KASARAGOD DISTRICT. 2. THE MANAGER, ORIENTAL INSURANCE CO.LTD., PLRESS CLUB JUNCTION, M.G.ROAD, KASARAGOD. 3. C.K.KRISHNAN, S/O.KANNAN, (DIED), L.R. IMPLEADED PERALADUKAM, P.O.KALATHUR, (VIA) CHENGALA, KASARAGOD DISTRICT. MACA.No. 2465 of 2009 SUPPLEMENTAL RESPONDENTS :- ------------------------------------------------ 4. VELLACHI, W/O. LATE C.K.KRISHNAN, AGED 65 YEARS, PERLADUKKAM HOUSE, P.O.KOLATHUR, VIA CHENGALA, BEDADUKKA PANCHAYATH, KASARGOD DISRICT. 5. VANAJA, D/O. LATE C.K.KRISHNAN, AGED 48 YEARS, PERLADUKKAM HOUSE, P.O.KOLATHUR, VIA CHENGALA, BEDADUKKA PANCHAYATH, KASARGOD DISRICT. 6. SASI, S/O. LATE C.K.KRISHNAN, AGED 45 YEARS, PERLADUKKAM HOUSE, P.O.KOLATHUR, VIA CHENGALA, BEDADUKKA PANCHAYATH, KASARGOD DISRICT. 7. RADHA, D/O. LATE C.K.KRISHNAN, AGED 42 YEARS, PERLADUKKAM HOUSE, P.O.KOLATHUR, VIA CHENGALA, BEDADUKKA PANCHAYATH, KASARGOD DISRICT. 8. JANARDHANAN, S/O. LATE C.K.KRISHNAN, AGED 38 YEARS, PERLADUKKAM HOUSE, P.O.KOLATHUR, VIA CHENGALA, BEDADUKKA PANCHAYATH, KASARGOD DISRICT. SUPPLEMENTAL RESPONDENTS 4 TO 8 ARE IMPLEADED AS LEGAL HEIRS OF DECEASED 3RD RESPONDENT VIDE ORDER DATED 21.5.2010 IN I.A. 208/2010. ADV. SRI.GEORGE CHERIAN (THIRUVALLA) FOR R2 THIS MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS APPEAL HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 29/06/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: jvt M.N.KRISHNAN, J. ------------------------- M.A.C.A. No.2465 of 2009 ----------------------------------- Dated this the 29th day of June 2010 J U D G M E N T This is an appeal preferred against the award of the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Kasaragod in O.P.(MV) No.260 of 2005. While the claimant was travelling in a bicycle it was hit by a jeep from behind resulting injuries to him. The Tribunal awarded him a compensation of Rs.18,500/- and directed the owner of the vehicle namely; the 3rd respondent in the O.P. to pay the compensation. The insurance company was exonerated from the liability on the ground that the driver did not have a badge to drive the vehicle at the time of the accident. It is against that decision, the claimant has come up in appeal for enhancement and making the insurance company liable for the amount. 2. Heard the learned counsel for the appellant as well as the insurance company. The owner remained ex-parte before the court below and his legal M.A.C.A. No.2465 of 2009 : 2 : representatives impleaded here did not response in spite of notice in the impleading petition and therefore, this Court is proceeding to dispose of the matter. 3. Let me first consider the quantum of compensation awarded by the Tribunal. The claimant had sustained injuries whereby he had lost 3 teeth in the accident and another serious problem which is pain over pelvis. It is true that it was not revealed that there was any fracture. He was an inpatient in the hospital for a period of 7 days and that he had expended Rs.4,377/- for the treatment. The Tribunal awarded a sum of Rs.18,500/-. Considering the fact that the claimant had sustained facial injuries as well as injuries affecting the pelvis, I am enhancing the compensation for pain and suffering by Rs.4,000/-. Nothing is awarded for the loss of teeth. Considering the age as 40, I am inclined to grant Rs.6,000/- towards the loss of three teeth. When there is serious injuries in pelvis coupled with loss of three teeth, there M.A.C.A. No.2465 of 2009 : 3 : would be loss of amenities and enjoyment of life. Therefore, I award Rs.3,000/- under this head, thus making an additional compensation of Rs.13,000/-. 4. The next question is regarding the exoneration of the insurance company from the liability. The Tribunal found that the driver did not have badge to drive the jeep which was used as commercial vehicle. A commercial vehicle comes within the decision of Transport of Vehicle under Sec.2(47) of the Motor Vehicles Act. Though the laden weight of the jeep is less than 7500kgms., the honourable Supreme Court has considered impact of the same in the light of Sec.10 and 3 of the Motor Vehicles Act and held that under Sec.3, it is mandatory to have a license prescribed as per the rules. So in order to have an authorization to drive a transport vehicle a badge is necessary. This is absent in this case. Therefore it has to be held that there are breach of policy conditions. So far as the claimant is concerned, he is only a third party and M.A.C.A. No.2465 of 2009 : 4 : therefore the party need not be affected by the breach of policy conditions. So I direct the insurance company to pay the entire amount and get it recover from the legal representatives of the deceased of his assets which they have obtained from their father. In the result, M.A.C.A. is partly allowed and the claimant is awarded an additional compensation of Rs.13,000/- with 7.5% interest on the said sum from the date of petition till realization and the 2nd respondent, insurance company is directed to deposit this amount plus the amount awarded by the Tribunal ie; Rs.18,500/- with 9% interest as ordered by the Tribunal and on satisfaction of the award recover it from the legal representatives of the deceased from the assets that is derived by them from their father. M.N.KRISHNAN, JUDGE Jvt