IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
MACA No. 348 of 2006()
1. ABDURAHIMAN, S/O.LATE ABBAS,
... Petitioner
Vs
1. THE ORIENTAL INSURANCE CO.LTD.,
... Respondent
For Petitioner :SRI.BABU S. NAIR
For Respondent :SRI.A.R.GEORGE
The Hon'ble MR. Justice J.B.KOSHY
The Hon'ble MRS. Justice K.HEMA
Dated :04/02/2008
O R D E R
J.B.KOSHY & K.HEMA, JJ.
--------------------------------------
M.A.C.A.No.348 OF 2006
-------------------------------------
Dated 4th February, 2008
JUDGMENT
Ko
shy,J.
Appellant/claimant met with an accident at the age of 28. As
a result of the accident he sustained the following injuries:
“1) Subdural Haematoma right temporal area.
2) Head injury.
3) Tenden injuries of extensor pollicis longus.
4) Extending indicis extendins digitorum to middle
Index finger (R).
5) Tender and muscle injury repaired (muscle
suturing).
6) Lacerated wound over dorsum of right hand and
right leg.
7) Crush injury extending tendon or right Index
finger and dorsum of hand.
8) Lacerated wound over lateral aspect of right
leg, suturing done, arm slab given,
9) Drooping of right eyelid.
10) Lod odema and cerymosin present in right
uplid.
11) Abrasion over the right eye brow.
12) Sub-conjunctival humerage on the temporal
area.
13) Optima Nerve injury right eye.”
Tribunal accepted the disability certificate assessing his disability as
30%, but, awarded only Rs.93,614/= against a claim of Rs.5,00,000/=.
According to the appellant, he was doing hotel business and getting
MACA.348/2006 2
Rs.4,500/= per month. However, no evidence was produced to show
that he was doing hotel business. Tribunal has taken only Rs.1,250/=
per month (Rs.15,000/= per year) as the notional income. Even for a
child below three years, the notional income fixed as per the second
schedule is Rs.15,000/=. Here, the injured was aged 28 and he was
not a non-earning person even though income from the hotel business
was not proved. The accident occurred on 18.7.2000. The second
schedule was framed in 1994. Taking all circumstances, we fix his
monthly income as Rs.2,000/= per month. Tribunal has accepted
30% disability and also taken 18 as the multiplier taking guidance
from the second schedule. Multiplier needs no enhancement.
Considering Rs.2,000/= as the monthly income, total
compensation payable for 30% disability will be Rs.1,29,600/=
(2,000 x 12 x 30 x 18). Tribunal has awarded only Rs.81,000/=
100
for disability and loss of earning power and for other difficulties
caused due to the injuries. Hence, he is entitled to an additional
amount of Rs.48,600/= under this head. Tribunal did not award any
amouant for pain and suffering. Considering the injuries, we are of
the opinion that at least Rs.10,000/= ought to have been awarded for
pain and suffering. Tribunal found that he was unable to do work for
six months, for the period under treatment, and Rs.7,500/= was
awarded taking Rs.1,250/= as monthly income. Since we have taken
MACA.348/2006 3
monthly income as Rs.2,000/=, he is entitled to an additional amount
of Rs.4,500/= under that head. It is submitted that for transport to
hospital only Rs.1,000/= was granted. He was to be taken from the
place to the hospital and for following treatment also travel has to be
conducted in special conveyance. He was in the hospital for 16 days.
Only Rs.2,614/= awarded for medical expenses which is covered by
actual bills. There will be many expenses which are not covered by
the bills. Therefore, for transportation and additional medical
expenses we award Rs.900/=. Thus, the appellant is entitled to
Rs.64,000/= more than that was awarded by the Tribunal. The above
amount should be deposited by the third respondent insurance
company with 7.5% interest from the date of application till its
deposit, over and above the amount decreed by the Tribunal. On
deposit of the amount, the appellant is allowed to withdraw the same.
The appeal is partly allowed.
J.B.KOSHY
JUDGE
K.HEMA
JUDGE
tks