High Court Kerala High Court

Mohanan vs H.N.Badra Reddy on 12 July, 2010

Kerala High Court
Mohanan vs H.N.Badra Reddy on 12 July, 2010
       

  

  

 
 
  IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

MACA.No. 1503 of 2009()


1. MOHANAN, S/O. VELAYUDHAN, AMBATTUPARAMBU
                      ...  Petitioner

                        Vs



1. H.N.BADRA REDDY, S/O. NARAYANA REDDY,
                       ...       Respondent

2. THE UNITED INDIA INSURANCE CO. LTD.,

                For Petitioner  :SRI.LIJU. M.P

                For Respondent  :SMT.T.C.SOWMIAVATHY

The Hon'ble MR. Justice A.K.BASHEER
The Hon'ble MR. Justice P.Q.BARKATH ALI

 Dated :12/07/2010

 O R D E R
             A.K.BASHEER & P.Q.BARKATH ALI, JJ.
                      - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
                       M.A.C.A. No.1503 OF 2009
                  - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
                    Dated this the 12th day of July, 2010

                                JUDGMENT

Basheer, J.

The only point urged by learned counsel for the appellant before

us is whether the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal was justified in

disallowing any compensation for the injury sustained by the appellant

on his genital organ.

2. The Tribunal after considering the oral and documentary

evidence adduced by the appellant awarded a total sum of Rs. 83,500/-

with 6% interest from the date of petition till the date of realisation. Of

course, the Tribunal awarded a sum of Rs. 25,000/- for loss of

amenities and enjoyment of his normal marital life apart from a sum of

Rs. 15,000/- for pain and suffering and Rs.26,541/- towards medical

expenses.

3. The appellant had got himself examined as PW1 and

deposed about the nature of the injuries sustained by him particularly

to his genital organ. Ext.A3, wound certificate will reveal that the

MACA.No.1503/2009 2

major injury sustained by the appellant was on his hip region.

4. Ext.A4, the certificate issued by Dr.Darwin D.Therattil, a

Consultant Urologist, will reveal that the appellant had been put on

intermittent urethral catheterisation and was left with a urethral

disorder which could not be effectively cured by treatment. The

accident had occurred in the year 1999. Ext.A4 certificate was issued

by the doctor in May 2001, the relevant portion of which is extracted

hereunder :

” He has undergone four major surgical

interventions for the same. He is on intermittent urethral

catheterisation and is left with a urethral disorder which

cannot be effectively cured by treatment. He has no

sexual function for the penis after the accident due to

injury to blood vessels concerned with penile erection.

He has got a total permanent disability of 40%( forty

percent).”

5. The doctor who issued Ext.A3 was examined as PW2. He

stated that the disorder of the appellant cannot be cured. But still, the

MACA.No.1503/2009 3

Tribunal took the view that the disability certified by the doctor as 40%

cannot be accepted. According to the Tribunal, the disability can be

only loss of amenities and enjoyment of his normal marital life and

therefore appellant would not be entitled to get compensation for the

alleged disability. But still, the Tribunal awarded a sum of Rs. 25,000/-

for loss of amenities and enjoyment of his normal marital life. We are

unable to comprehend rationale of the above view taken by learned

Judge, to say the least.

6. Having regard to the medical evidence adduced by the

appellant before the Tribunal and having perused Exts.A3 and A4

certificates, we have no hesitation to hold that the appellant is entitled

to get reasonable compensation for the injury sustained by him on his

genital organ and the resultant disability caused to him because of that

injury in addition to the compensation awarded under the other heads.

7. It is on record that the appellant was working as a Motor

Mechanic. He was aged 22 at the time of the accident. According to

him, he was earning a monthly income of Rs. 4,500/-. But the

Tribunal has assessed his monthly income as Rs. 1500/-. In the facts

MACA.No.1503/2009 4

and circumstances of the case, we are of the view that the monthly

income of the appellant can be reckoned as Rs. 2,500/-. The

compensation payable to the appellant for the disability suffered by

him can be calculated thus:

2500 x 12 x 17 x 25/100 = Rs. 1,27,500/-

8. We are not disturbing the amount granted by the Tribunal

to the appellant under the head of loss of amenities and enjoyment of

life. The appellant shall be entitled to get interest on the entire amount

of compensation at the rate of 7.5%. However, he shall not be eligible

to get interest for the period of delay of 775 days with which the appeal

was filed.

The Appeal is disposed of in the above terms.

A.K.BASHEER, JUDGE

P.Q.BARKATH ALI, JUDGE

sv.

MACA.No.1503/2009 5

MACA.No.1503/2009 6