IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
MACA.No. 1088 of 2005()
1. CHANDHINI @ SANTHINI, W/O. MOHANAN,
... Petitioner
Vs
1. K.A. THOMACHAN, S/O. ANTONY,
... Respondent
2. JOSE P.V., S/O. VARKEY,
3. KERALA STATE INSURANCE DEPARTMENT,
4. ALICE JOSE, W/O. C.T. JOSE,
5. VIJU DAVIS, S/O. DEVASSY,
6. ORIENTAL INSURANCE COMPANY LIMITED,
For Petitioner :SRI.P.V.CHANDRA MOHAN
For Respondent :GOVERNMENT PLEADER
The Hon'ble MR. Justice A.K.BASHEER
The Hon'ble MR. Justice P.Q.BARKATH ALI
Dated :09/07/2010
O R D E R
A. K. BASHEER & P.Q. BARKATH ALI, JJ.
----------------------------------------------------
M.A.C.A. NO. 1088 OF 2005
--------------------------------------
DATED THIS THE 9TH DAY OF JULY,2010
JUDGMENT
Barkath Ali, J.
In this appeal under Section 173 of Motor Vehicles Act, the
claimant a lady aged 26 in OP(MV)No.2649/2000 on the file of Motor
Accidents Claims Tribunal, Thrissur challenges the judgment and
award of the Tribunal dated February 2, 2005 awarding a
compensation of Rs. 3,30,200/- for the loss caused to the claimant
on account of the injuries sustained by him in a motor accident.
2. The facts leading to this appeal in brief are these:
On April 19, 2000 at about 8.15 A.M. at Manapadi,
Peramangalam on Thrissur-Kunnamkulam National Highway the bus
bearing registration No. KL-8/J-5151, in which the claimant was
travelling collided head on with a bus bearing registration No.KL-8/D-
1116. The claimant who was travelling in the bus bearing registration
No. KL-8/J-5151 sustained serious injuries. According to the
claimant the accident occurred due to the negligence on the part of
M.A.C.A. NO. 1088 OF 2005
2
drivers of both the buses. Respondents 1 to 3, as the owner, driver
and insurer of the bus bearing registration No. KL-8/J-5151 and
respondents 4 to 6 as the owner, driver and insurer of the bus
bearing registration No. KL-8/D-1116 are jointly and severally liable
to pay compensation to the claimant. Claimant claimed a
compensation of Rs.12,53,000/-.
3. Respondents 1,2,4 and 5, the owners and drivers of both
the buses remained absent and were ex-parte by the Tribunal.
Respondents 3 and 6 insurers of the respective buses filed written
statement admitting the policy, but attributed the negligence to the
driver of other bus.
4. This OP was tried along with the other O.Ps filed by other
injured persons in the same accident and a common award was
passed. Altogether PW1 to PW5 were examined and Exts. A1 to
A52 were marked on the side of the claimant. On the side of
respondents, Ext.B1 was marked. On an appreciation of evidence,
the Tribunal found that accident occurred due to the negligence of
drivers of both the buses and awarded a compensation of Rs.
M.A.C.A. NO. 1088 OF 2005
3
3,30,200/- with interest @ 6% per annum from the date of petition
till realization and a cost of Rs. 12,000/-. 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 companies.
6. The accident is not disputed. The finding of the Tribunal
that the accident occurred due to the negligence on the part of
drivers of both the buses 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 claimant sustained the following injuries as revealed
from Ext.A14, the copy of wound certificate issued from the hospital:
(a) Amputation of right hand at shoulder level
(b) Head injury
) Complete loss of vision to right eye
(d) Multiple bodily injuries
Ext.A19 is the discharge summary card issued issued from West Fort,
M.A.C.A. NO. 1088 OF 2005
4hospital, Thrissur. It is stated therein that the claimant was in the
hospital from April 19 to May 4 of 2000. Ext.A24, the Ophthalmic
report issued by Ophthalmic Surgeon shows that there was
completely loss of vision to her right eye. Ext.A25, the certificate of
disability issued by the Doctor, Medical College hospital, Thrissur
shows that the injured suffers a permanent physical disability of
90%. Ext.A28, the certificate issued by ophthalmic Surgeon, Mother
Hospital, Thrissur shows that she has 20% of disability consequent
to the loss of vision to right eye.
8. The Tribunal awarded a total compensation of Rs.
3,30,200/-. The break up of the compensation awarded is as under:
For loss of earnings : Rs. 12,000
(for 6 months)
Medical expense including : Rs. 32,000
expenses for transportation
and bystander
For pain and suffering : Rs. 15,000
For loss of amenities : Rs. 12,000
Disability caused : Rs.2,59,200
------------
Total: :Rs. 3,30,200
============
M.A.C.A. NO. 1088 OF 2005
5
9. The counsel for the claimant sought enhancement of the
compensation for the disability caused, for loss of amenities and
enjoyment of life and for pain and suffering. The Tribunal took the
monthly income of the claimant as Rs. 2,000/- and adopted a
multiplier 18 and took the disability as 60% and awarded a
compensation of Rs. 2,59,200/- for the permanent disability caused.
10. Taking into consideration of the fact that her one hand
was amputated and there was loss of vision to one eye, we feel that
her percentage for disability can be reasonably fixed as 90%. As the
claimant was aged 25 at the time of accident, we feel that proper
multiplier in this case would be 18. As PW2 she testified before the
Tribunal that she used to earn Rs. 150/- per day by conducting a
small dairy farm. But no document was produced by her to show
her income. Therefore, the monthly income of the claimant taken as
2000/- by the Tribunal appears reasonable. Thus calculated, the
claimant is entitled to a compensation of Rs. 3,88,800/-( 2000 x 12 x
18 x 90%) for the disability caused. Thus, on this count claimant is
entitled to an additional compensation of Rs. 1,29,600/-.
M.A.C.A. NO. 1088 OF 2005
6
11. The Tribunal awarded a compensation of Rs. 12,000 for
loss of amenities and enjoyment of life which appears to be very low.
Taking into consideration serious nature of injuries sustained, we feel
that a compensation of Rs. 25,000/- would be reasonable on this
count. Thus, on this the claimant is entitled to an additional
compensation of Rs. 13,000/-.
12. The tribunal awarded Rs. 15,000/- as compensation for
pain and suffering which, in our view, quite inadequate. We feel that
a compensation of Rs. 25,000/- would be reasonable on this count.
Thus, the claimant is entitled to an additional compensation of Rs.
10,000/- on this count. As regards Compensation awarded under
other heads, we feel that the same to be reasonable . Therefore, we
are not disturbing the same.
Thus, the claimant is entitled to an additional compensation of
Rs. 1,52,600/-. The claimant is entitled to interest @ 6% per annum
from the date of petition till realization. The 3rd and 6th respondents
being the insurers of offending vehicles equally deposit the amount
before the Tribunal in equal shares within two months from the date
M.A.C.A. NO. 1088 OF 2005
7
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
PKK
M.A.C.A. NO. 1088 OF 2005
8
M.A.C.A. NO. 1088 OF 2005
9