IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
MACA.No. 729 of 2003()
1. ABDUL MAJEED, AGED 34 YEARS,
... Petitioner
Vs
1. KALATHINGAL ABDUL NAZAR,
... Respondent
2. M.P. ABDURAHIMAN HAJI,
3. UNITED INDIA INSURANCE COMPNAY LTD.,
For Petitioner :SRI.K.M.SATHYANATHA MENON
For Respondent :SRI.BABU S. NAIR
The Hon'ble MR. Justice A.K.BASHEER
The Hon'ble MR. Justice P.Q.BARKATH ALI
Dated :21/05/2010
O R D E R
A.K. BASHEER & P.Q. BARKATH ALI, JJ.
------------------------------------------------------
M.A.C.A. 729 of 2003
------------------------------------------------------
Dated: MAY 21, 2010
JUDGMENT
Barkath Ali, J.
In this appeal under sec.173 of the Motor Vehicles Act the claimant
in OP(MV) 1443/1998 on the file of the Motor Accidents Claims
Tribunal, Manjeri challenges the judgment and award of the
Tribunal dated April 4, 2003 awarding a compensation of
Rs.1,06,400/- 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 May
15, 1998 at about 4 p.m. the claimant was travelling in the jeep
bearing registration No.KEZ 841 from Olavattur to Pulikkal. When the
jeep reached at Pulikkal Pampoorippara due to the rash and negligent
driving of the jeep by the 1st respondent, it lost control and capsized
on the side of the road. The claimant sustained serious injuries.
According to the claimant the accident occurred due to the rash and
negligent driving of the offending jeep by the 1st respondent. The
1st respondent as the driver, the 2nd respondent as the owner and
the 3rd respondent as the insurer of the offending jeep are jointly and
severally liable to pay compensation to the claimant.
3. Respondent No. 1, the driver of the offending jeep filed a
M.A.C.A. 729 of 2003 2
written statement admitting the accident but denying the liability.
The 2nd respondent, owner of the offending jeep, did not file any
written statement. The 3rd respondent insurer of the offending jeep,
filed a written statement admitting the policy.
4. This O.P. was jointly tried along with other OPs. filed by
other injured persons and a common award was passed. Exts.A1 to
A5 and Ext. X1 disability certificate of the Medical Board were marked
on the side of the claimant before the Tribunal. On the side of the
contesting 3rd respondent Ext.X2 was marked. On an appreciation of
evidence the Tribunal awarded a compensation of Rs.1,06,400/-. The
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 Company.
6. The accident is not disputed. The finding of the Tribunal that
the accident occurred due to the negligence on the part of the 1st
respondent 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. Ext.A2, discharge summary issued from the hospital, shows
that the claimant has sustained compression fracture T12 vertebra,
M.A.C.A. 729 of 2003 3
fracture ribs left with pnemothorax, orbital haematoma right eye. He
was in the hospital for 14 days and intercostal drainage was done.
Ext.A3 is the CT scan report which shows that the impression: fracture
of the right lamina papyracea with haemorrhage into the right
ethmoidal air cells and right maxillary antrum. Ext.A3(a) is the
discharge summary of the Moulana Hospital, Perinthalmanna which
shows that the claimant was admitted on 6.9.1998 and was discharged
on 10.9.1998. Ext.X1 certificate of disability issued by the Medical
Board shows that he has now 19% partial permanent disability.
Ext.X1 shows that the claimant has now severe kyphosis of thoracic
spine at the fracture site.
8. The Tribunal awarded a total compensation of Rs.1,06,400/-.
The break up of the compensation awarded is as under:-
loss of earnings - Rs.10,800/-
transport to hospital - 1,500/-
extra nourishment - 1,000/-
damage to clothing - 300/-
medical expenses - 8,000/-
pain and suffering - 15,000/-
Disability - 69,800/-
---------------------
Total - 1,06,400/-
============
M.A.C.A. 729 of 2003 4
9. The Counsel for the appellant/claimant sought enhancement
of the compensation for the disability caused, loss of
amenities/enjoyment of life and for pain and suffering endured. The
Tribunal took the monthly income of the claimant as Rs.1800/-,
adopted a multiplier of 17 and accepted the percentage of disability
noted in Ext.X1 and awarded Rs.61,800/- for the disability caused.
The claimant was a coolie aged 34. Therefore we feel that his
monthly income can be reasonably assessed as Rs.2,250/-. The
percentage of disability as well as the multiplier adopted by the
Tribunal are not seriously challenged. Thus calculated, for the
disability caused the claimant is entitled to a compensation of
Rs.87,210/-. Thus on this count the claimant is entitled to an
additional compensation of Rs.17,410/-.
10. For the pain and suffering endured, the Tribunal awarded a
compensation of Rs.15000/- which appears to be very low. Taking
into consideration the nature of the injuries sustained, we feel that a
compensation of Rs.20,000/- would be reasonable on this count.
Thus on this count the claimant is entitled to an additional
compensation of Rs.5,000/-.
11. For the loss of amenities/enjoyment of life, the Tribunal did
not award any compensation. Taking into consideration the nature of
M.A.C.A. 729 of 2003 5
the injuries sustained,we feel that a compensation of Rs.10,000/-
would be reasonable on this count. As regards the compensation
awarded under other heads, we find the same to be reasonable and
therefore we are not disturbing the same.
12. Thus the claimant is entitled to an additional compensation
of Rs.32,410/-. He is entitled to interest @ 9% per annum from the
date of petition till realisation and proportionate cost. The 3rd
respondent being the insurer of the offending vehicle shall deposit the
amount before the Tribunal within two months from the date 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
mt/-