IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
MACA.No. 1480 of 2007(Y)
1. BIJOY AGED 28,S/O.CHANDRAN PARAMBIKADAN
... Petitioner
Vs
1. MATHEW JOSE, VETTIKOMBIL HOUSE,
... Respondent
2. JOPHY MATHEW,S/O. MATHEW.DO...DO...
3. THE MANAGER UNITED INDIA INSURANCE
4. E.M.SASIDHARAN S/O. EDATHADAN MADHAVAN,
5. THE MANAGER ORIENTAL INSURANCE VO LTD
For Petitioner :SRI.T.N.MANOJ
For Respondent :SRI.P.V.JYOTHI PRASAD
The Hon'ble MR. Justice P.R.RAMAN
The Hon'ble MR. Justice P.R.RAMACHANDRA MENON
Dated :13/11/2009
O R D E R
P.R. RAMAN &
P.R. RAMACHANDRA MENON, JJ.
-----------------------------------------------
M.A.C.A. No. 1480 of 2007
---------------------------------------------
Dated, this the 13th day of November, 2009
J U D G M E N T
P.R.Ramachandra Menon, J.
The appeal arises from the Award passed by the MACT, Irinjalakuda in
OP (MV) No. 918/2001, which was preferred by the appellant/claimant
seeking compensation in respect of the injuries sustained in the accident on
15.08.2000. The appellant/claimant was proceeding as a pillion rider on the
motor cycle from Athirappilly to Chalakudy on 15.08.2000 at about 5.15 p.m.
When the motor cycle reached at Konnakuzhi, a car bearing No. PY/01 3141
coming from the opposite direction dashed against the motor cycle causing
serious injuries, which led to the claim.
2. The claim petition was originally preferred against the owner,
driver and Insurer of the car. Subsequently, taking note of the contention
raised from the part of the Insurer of the car, as to non joinder of necessary
parties, the owner-cum-driver and Insurer of the scooter were also brought in
the party array. The evidence consists of the oral testimony of PW1 to PW4,
documents produced and marked as Exts.A1 to A11 from the part of the
claimant and Ext.B1 copy of the Policy produced from the part of the insurer.
After analyzing the pleadings and evidence on record, the Tribunal arrived at
a clear finding that the accident occurred only because of the negligence on
MACA No. 1480 of 2007 2
the part of the driver of the car.
3. After taking note of the nature and extent of injuries sustained
and the consequences resulted, the Tribunal awarded various amounts
under the permissible heads fixing the total compensation payable at
Rs.2,27,181/- which is inclusive of a sum of Rs.1,21,581/- towards the
medical expenses as well. Learned counsel for the appellant submits that
the amount awarded by the Tribunal, particularly towards the permanent
disability is abysmally low; for the reason that, despite the certified
permanent disability of 25%, and the oral testimony of the Doctor who was
examined as PW2, only an extent of 12% was reckoned by the Tribunal.
Learned counsel also refers to the serious nature of disfiguration caused by
the accident, by producing some photograph along with I.A.1750/2007 and
states that absolutely no amount has been awarded by the Tribunal under
this head.
4. The compensation for the permanent disability has been
awarded by the Tribunal reckoning a sum of Rs.2,500/- as the monthly
income and adopting the multiplier as 17, taking note of the age of claimant
as 22 years at the time of accident; thus granting Rs.61,200/- under this
head. Considering the seriousness of the injuries sustained, the
circumstance under which the percentage of disability certified as per
Ext.A10 was brought down from 25% to 12%, despite examining the Doctor
as PW2, is not discernible from the Award, when shortening of the leg by 2
MACA No. 1480 of 2007 3
inches is held as proven. On going through the facts and figures, we find
that fixation of permanent disability as 12% is much on the lower side and we
find it fit, just and proper to have the same enhanced to 18%, weighing the
evidence as a whole. On re-working the compensation payable towards the
permanent disability reckoning the figures as above, the appellant will be
entitled to get a further sum of Rs.30,600/-. We also find it fit and proper to
award a sum of Rs.5,000/- as sought for by the appellant/claimant, in respect
of the ‘disfiguration’ caused to him.
5. In the result, we grant a further sum of Rs.35,600/- towards the
additional compensation payable in respect of the injuries sustained in the
accident. The amounts under all other heads appear to be very much
reasonable and adequate. We hereby direct the 3rd respondent Insurance
Company to deposit the above sum of Rs.35,600/- with interest at the rate of
7% from the date of application till the date of payment, as expeditiously as
possible, at any rate, within two months from the date of receipt of a copy of
this judgment.
The appeal is allowed in part. No cost.
P.R. RAMAN, JUDGE
P. R. RAMACHANDRA MENON, JUDGE
dnc