IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE A.K.BASHEER & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.Q.BARKATH ALI MONDAY, THE 21ST FEBRUARY 2011 / 2ND PHALGUNA 1932 MACA.No. 2118 of 2007() ----------------------- OPMV.1006/2004 of MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS TRIBUNAL, PALA .................... APPELLANT(S): APPELLANT/PETITIONER ---------------------------------- SHAJI A.G. @ SAJIMON, S/O.GOPALAN, ALUMTHRAYIL HOUSE, MLAMALA PUTHUVAL BHAGAM, MLAMALA KARA, PEERUMEDU VILLAGE, NOW R/AT. ALUMATHRAYIL HOUSE, MADUKKA KARA AND P.O., ERUMELY NORTH VILLAGE. BY ADV. SRI.ABRAHAM MATHEW (VETTOOR) RESPONDENT(S): --------------- 1. JOSE THOMAS @ JOJO, S/O.THOMAS, MEKKATTU HOUSE, ANAKALLU KARA, KANJIRAPPALLY VILLAGE. 2. THE HDFC CHUBB GENERAL INSURANCE CO.LTD. REP. BY ITS MANAGER, 5TH FLOOR, EXPRESS TOWERS, NARIMAN POINT, MUMBAI-400 021. ADV. SRI.A.R.GEORGE FOR R2 THIS MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS APPEAL HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 21/02/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: A.K.BASHEER & P.Q.BARKATH ALI, JJ. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - M.A.C.A.No.2118 OF 2007 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Dated this the 21st day of February, 2011 JUDGMENT Barkath Ali, J. Appellant is the claimant in O.P.(MV)No.1006/2004 on the file of Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Pala. In this appeal he challenges the judgment and award of the Tribunal dated December 6, 2006 awarding a compensation of Rs.75,510/- for the loss caused to him on account of the injuries sustained by him in a motor accident. He sustained the following injuries in that accident that occurred on July 15, 2004 at about 3.45.p.m. : Fracture of shaft of left femur and lacerated wound on the forehead. 2. The accident happened while the claimant was riding the motor cycle bearing Reg.No.KL-6/C-2106 from Kottayam to Mlamala. When he reached at Chuzhuppu Junction in Peruvanthanam village, he was knocked down by the car bearing Reg.No.KL-5/R 4222 driven by the first respondent. Alleging negligence against the first respondent, the claimant filed the O.P. before the Tribunal under Section 166 of MACA.No.2118/2007 2 Motor Vehicles Act claiming a compensation of Rs. 2,00,000/-. 3. Respondent No. 1, the driver of the offending car remained absent before the Tribunal. The second respondent, the insurer of the offending car filed a written statement admitting the policy. 4. This O.P. was jointly tried along wit the other O.P. filed by the pillion rider of the motor cycle and a common award was passed by the Tribunal. Exts.A1 to A21 were marked on the side of the claimant before the Tribunal. No evidence was adduced by the contesting second respondent. The Tribunal on an appreciation of evidence found that the accident occurred due to the rash and negligent driving of the offending car by first respondent and awarded a compensation of Rs. 75,510/- with interest @ 7.5% per annum from the date of petition till realisation and a cost of Rs.1,880/-. 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 MACA.No.2118/2007 3 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 Tribunal awarded a total compensation of Rs.75,510/-. The break up of the compensation amount awarded is as under: Medical expenses - Rs. 9,870/- Loss of earnings - Rs. 6,000/- Bystander expenses - Rs. 3,000/- Extra nourishment - Rs. 250/- Damage to clothing - Rs. 250/- Transport to hospital - Rs. 500/- Pain and suffering - Rs. 15,000/- Disability - Rs. 32,640/- Loss of amenities - Rs. 8,000/- 8. Counsel for the claimant sought enhancement of compensation for the disability caused , for pain and suffering endured and for loss of amenities and enjoyment of life. 9. The Tribunal took the monthly income of the claimant as Rs.2,000/- and took the percentage of disability as 8% and adopted a multiplier of 17 as he was aged 32 at the time of the accident and awarded Rs. 32,640/- for the disability caused. According to the claimant, he was a coolie earning Rs. 3,000/- per month. Taking into MACA.No.2118/2007 4 consideration the above aspect, we feel that the monthly income of the claimant can be reasonably fixed at Rs. 3,000/-. 10. As regards the percentage of disability caused, in Ext.A10 certificate of disability issued by the Senior Lecturer of Orthopaedics, Medical College Hospital, Kottayam it is certified that the claimant has suffered a disability of 14%. Taking into consideration the nature of disability caused to the claimant 8% disability taken by the Tribunal appears reasonable. The multiplier as 17 taken by the Tribunal is not seriously challenged. Thus calculated for the disability caused, the claimant is entitled to a compensation of Rs. 48,960/- ( 8% x 3000 x 12 x 17). Thus on this count, the claimant is entitled to an additional compensation of Rs.16,320/-. 11. The Tribunal awarded Rs.8,000/- for loss of amenities and enjoyment in life and Rs.15,000/- for pain and suffering endured. Taking into consideration the nature of the injuries sustained by the claimant, we feel that a compensated of Rs. 20,000/- each for loss of amenities and enjoyment in life and for pain and suffering endured would be reasonable. 12. There is another aspect in this case. The Tribunal awarded MACA.No.2118/2007 5 Rs. 6,000/- towards loss of earnings for 3 months @ Rs. 2,000/- per month. As we have fixed the monthly income of the claimant as Rs. 3,000/-, he is entitled to a compensation of Rs. 9,000/- towards loss of earnings. As regards the compensation awarded under other heads, we find the same to be reasonable and therefore we are not disturbing the same. 13. In the result, the claimant is entitled to an additional compensation of Rs. 36,320/-. He is entitled to interest @ 7.5% per annum from the date of petition till realisation and proportionate cost. The second 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.2118/2007 6 MACA.No.2118/2007 7