Jobby George vs Dr. Civy V.Pulayath on 30 July, 2010

Kerala High Court
Jobby George vs Dr. Civy V.Pulayath on 30 July, 2010




MACA.No. 1423 of 2005()

                      ...  Petitioner


                       ...       Respondent


                For Petitioner  :SRI.K.RAMACHANDRAN

                For Respondent  :SRI.VPK.PANICKER

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

 Dated :30/07/2010

 O R D E R
               A.K. BASHEER & P.Q. BARKATH ALI, JJ.


                         M.A.C.A. 1423 of 2005


                          Dated: JULY 30, 2010


Barkath Ali, J.

The appellant is the claimant in OP(MV) 1702/2000 on the

file of the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Muvattupuzha. He

sustained the following injuries when the car bearing registration

No.KL-7/AA 6767 in which he was travelling hit against an electric post

on the side of the road and capsized on Kurikunnam – Piravathanam

road on November 19, 2000 at about 8.30 p.m.:

“Lacerated wound on the left frontal region extending to the mid


Multiple lacerations over the face.

Lacerated wound over the left wrist 8×2 cm.

Lacerated wound left hand extending from the wrist to the root

of the finger.

Claiming a compensation of Rs.3 lakhs the claimant filed the OP before

the Tribunal under Sec.166 of the Motor Vehicles Act alleging

negligence against the 1st respondent, who was the owner-cum-

driver of the offending vehicle.

2. Respondent No.1 in his written statement admitted the

M.A.C.A. 1423 of 2005

accident, but denied the liability. The 2nd respondent, insurer of the

offending vehicle, filed a written statement admitting the policy.

3. This OP was jointly tried along with another OP filed by

another injured person in the accident and a common award was

passed. PWs.1 and 2 were examined and Exts.A1 to A20 were

marked on the side of the claimant before the Tribunal. Ext.B1 was

marked on the side of the respondents. On an appreciation of

evidence the Tribunal found that the accident occurred due to the

negligence of the 1st respondent and awarded a total compensation

of Rs.64000/- with interest @ 6% per annum from the date of petition

till realisation. The claimant has now come up in appeal challenging

the quantum of compensation awarded by the Tribunal.

4. Heard the counsel for the appellant/claimant and the

counsel for the Insurance Company.

5. 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.

6. The break up of the compensation amount awarded is as


M.A.C.A. 1423 of 2005

loss of earning                Rs.6000/-

transportation                    2500/-

damage to clothing                 500/-

extra nourishment                 1000/-

treatment expenses               39000/-

attendant's expenses              1000/-

pain and suffering                 8000/-

loss of amenities                  6000/-

       7.   Counsel for the claimant sought     compensation for the

disability caused and enhancement of the compensation for the pain

and suffering endured by the claimant. No compensation was

awarded by the Tribunal for the disability caused to the claimant. The

claimant suffered a permanent disability of 10% as seen from Ext.A12

certificate issued from the hospital. Ext.A12 shows that “FDS tendon

to little finger was severed and there was partial injury to FDS of

middle finger and partial injury to median nerve and that the injured

tendons were repaired”. Therefore we feel that the percentage of

disability suffered by the claimant can be taken as 5%. The Tribunal

took the monthly income of the claimant as Rs.1500/-. According to

the claimant he was a dental mechanic in A.J.Dental Lab,

Koothattukulam, earning Rs.4000/- per month. Ext.A16 is the copy of

registration as dental mechanic issued by Tamil Nadu Dental Council.

M.A.C.A. 1423 of 2005

Ext.A17 shows that the claimant has undergone two year dental

mechanic course at Sankarachariyar Dental College, Salem. Ext.A18 is

the salary certificate. Taking into consideration all these aspects, we

feel that his monthly income can be reasonably fixed at Rs.3000/-. A

multiplier of 17 would be reasonable in this case as he was aged 24 at

the time of the accident. Thus calculated, for the disability caused the

claimant is entitled to a compensation of Rs.30600/- (5% of 1500 x 12

x 17).

8. The Tribunal awarded Rs.8000/- as the compensation for

the pain and suffering endured by the claimant which appears to be

very low. Taking into consideration the nature of 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.

9. Thus the claimant is entitled to an additional compensation of

Rs.32,600/-. The Tribunal awarded interest only at the rate of 6%

per annum, which appears to be very low. He is entitled to interest @

7.5% per annum for the compensation already awarded and for the

enhanced compensation from the date of petition till realisation and

proportionate cost. The 2nd respondent being the insurer of the

M.A.C.A. 1423 of 2005

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.




Leave a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Cookies help us deliver our services. By using our services, you agree to our use of cookies. More Information