IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE M.SASIDHARAN NAMBIAR FRIDAY, THE 6TH FEBRUARY 2009 / 17TH MAGHA 1930 MACA.No. 1718 of 2008() ----------------------- OPMV.2895/2001 of MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS TRIBUNAL, ERNAKULAM .................... APPELLANT/ PETITIONER: ----------------------------- GOPALAN, S/O.MANIKKAN CHAKKAMADATHIL VEETTIL MALA, TRICHUR. BY ADV. SRI.K.A.SEBASTIAN SRI.P.A.BAHULEYAN RESPONDENT(S): RESPONDENTS -------------------------------------- 1. RAHIM . S/O.HAJARA BEEVI HOUSE 19/1169, PALLURUTHY, COCHIN-6. 2. K.R.PREMCHAND, S/O.K.M.RAGHAVAN POKKALASSERY HOUSE, SDPY ROAD, PALLURUTHY. 3. UNITED INDIA INSURANCE CO.LTD. BRANCH OFFICE, BANK OF BARODA BUILDING PALACE ROAD, P.B.228 COCHIN-682002. ADV. SRI.K.RAMAKUMAR, SENIOR ADVOCATE FOR R2 SRI.M.H.HANIS FOR R2 SRI.JOHN JOSEPH VETTIKAD FOR R3 THIS MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS APPEAL HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 06/02/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: M.SASIDHARAN NAMBIAR,J. =========================== M.A.C.A. NO. 1718 OF 2008 =========================== Dated this the 6th day of February,2009 JUDGMENT Appellant is challenging the quantum of compensation awarded by Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Ernakulam in a motor accident. On 28.11.2000 at about 8.30 p.m, while appellant was riding a bicycle along Moolamkuzhi Public road, he sustained injuries and was admitted as an inpatient in Medical Trust Hospital, Ernakulam. He was treated there for ten days. He claimed a total compensation of Rs.30,000/- contending that the accident was caused due to the negligent driving of the second respondent and driver and first respondent is vicariously liable and third respondent being the insurer is liable to pay the compensation. Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal on the evidence found that the accident was caused due to the M.A.C.A. 1718/2008 2 negligent driving of the vehicle by second respondent and being the owner first respondent is vicariously liable. As third respondent admitted a valid insurance policy, third respondent was directed to pay the compensation finding that the appellant was treated as inpatient for ten days in Medical Trust Hospital, Ernakulam evidenced by Ext.A5 discharge summary, for the injuries sustained proved by Ext.A2 wound certificate. It was also found that appellant spent Rs.4010/- towards medical expenses evidenced by Ext.A7 series. Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal without fixing the compensation under different heads directed to pay a global sum of Rs.9000/- with interest as compensation. Third respondent was directed to pay the same. 2. Learned counsel appearing for the appellant and third respondent were heard. 3. The argument of the learned counsel appearing for the appellant is that the compensation is very low and when appellant sustained lacerated wound on the upper lip and nose M.A.C.A. 1718/2008 3 which had to be sutured and appellant had to be treated as an inpatient for ten days and advised to take rest for one month, the compensation of Rs.9000/- is disproportionate to the injuries and therefore enhanced compensation is to be granted. 4. Learned counsel appearing for third respondent submitted that proper compensation was awarded. 5. On going through the award and the copies of Ext.A2 and A5, the wound certificate and the discharge summary, it is clear that Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal has not fixed the compensation properly. First of all only a global amount was awarded without specifying the specific heads for which the compensation is awarded. Considering the nature of the injury and the period of treatment, appellant is entitled to get a compensation of Rs.6000/- for pain and suffering. He has produced medical bills for Rs.4000/-. Appellant was treated as inpatient for ten days. Necessarily there may has to be a by-stander and also incidental expenses. Therefore towards M.A.C.A. 1718/2008 4 medical expenses, including the medical bills and the connected expenses appellant is entitled to get a compensation of Rs.6,000/-. Ext.A5 discharge summary shows that appellant was directed to take one month's bed rest. Eventhough there is no evidence to prove that the exact income of the appellant, Rs.1500/- the notional income is taken as the loss of earning for one month. Appellant is therefore entitled to a total compensation of Rs.13500/-. Deducting Rs.9000/- already awarded by the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, appellant is entitled to an additional compensation of Rs.4500/- with interest as awarded by the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, from the date of the petition. M.SASIDHARAN NAMBIAR JUDGE tpl/- M.SASIDHARAN NAMBIAR, J. --------------------- W.P.(C).NO. /06 --------------------- JUDGMENT SEPTEMBER,2006