IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
MFA.No. 679 of 2000(B)
1. AMMINI UMMACHAN
... Petitioner
Vs
1. THE MANAGING DIRECTOR, K.S.R.T.C.
... Respondent
For Petitioner :SRI.VIJU THOMAS
For Respondent :KSRTC STANDING COUNSEL
The Hon'ble MR. Justice M.N.KRISHNAN
Dated :25/06/2008
O R D E R
M.N. KRISHNAN, J.
= = = = = = = = = = = = = = =
M.F.A.NO. 679 OF 2000
= = = = = = = = = = = = = = =
Dated this the 25th day of June, 2008.
J U D G M E N T
This appeal is preferred against the award of the Motor
Accidents Claims Tribunal, Alappuzha in OP(MV)632/95. The
claimant sustained injuries in a road accident and the Tribunal
found that the accident took place on account of the
negligence of the KSRTC driver and awarded a compensation
of Rs.38,000/-. It is against that award the present appeal is
preferred for enhancement.
2. Heard the learned counsel. It is strongly contended
before me that the Tribunal has erred in not calculating the
compensation in accordance with the documents available. It
is seen that the claimant had sustained fracture of both bones
of the leg. She was initially admitted in the Medical College
Hospital for a day and thereafter in the KVM hospital for five
days and again in the month of October for another three
days. There was POP cast on her. Ext.A8 disability certificate
MFA 679 of 2000
-2-
is produced to show that she is having 5% disability on
account of the permanent impairment of the function on her
lower limb. Learned counsel has relied upon the certificate
issued by the Village Officer which did show that she was
having an annual income of Rs.48,000/-. According to the
learned counsel, her husband was conducting meat business
and after his death she continued the same and she is getting
income to maintain the family. The Tribunal unfortunately did
not calculate the compensation on the basis of the principles
and therefore one or two heads require recalculation. It is
certain that though he was injured and unable to attend, there
would have been somebody to assist her in running the
business and so there would not have been total loss of
income and therefore I feel that the income can be fixed safely
at Rs.2,500/- for the purpose of calculation and I grant loss of
earnings for a period of four months for the reason that she
was in POP cast from 27.8.94 to 5.1.95, that means she is
entitled to an actual loss of earnings of Rs.10,000/-. When
the income is taken at Rs.2,500/- per mensum and 5% is the
MFA 679 of 2000
-3-
disability, the loss of earning power would come to Rs.1,500/-.
When multiplier of 16 is used it would come to Rs.24,000/-.
So the total amount under these heads will come to
Rs.34,000/-. The Tribunal has awarded Rs.10,000/- for loss of
earnings and Rs.10,000/- for permanent disability. When it is
deducted, she will be entitled to a sum of Rs.14,000/- as
additional compensation. On all other heads the compensation
granted is retained.
In the result the MFA is partly allowed and the claimant
is awarded an additional compensation of Rs.14,000/- with 7%
interest on the said sum from the date of petition till
realisation and the KSRTC is directed to deposit the same
within a period of 90 days from the date of receipt of a copy of
the judgment.
M.N. KRISHNAN, JUDGE.
ul/-
MFA 679 of 2000
-4-
M.N. KRISHNAN, J.
= = = = = = = = = =
M.F.A. No. 679 OF 2000
= = = = = = = = = = =
J U D G M E N T
25th June, 2008.