IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
MFA.No. 458 of 2003(F)
1. K.P.BALAKRISHNAN, S/O.RAMAN NAMBUDIRI,
... Petitioner
Vs
1. RADHAKRISHNAN, S/O.RAMAN,
... Respondent
2. BHAGYALAKSHMY, D/O.ACHUTHAMENON,
3. UNITED INDIA INSURANCE CO.LTD.,
4. NARAYANANKUTTY, S/O.KRISHNANKUTTY NAIR,
5. BALAKRISHNAN, S/O.PONNU, NADUKANNI,
6. NEW INDIA ASSURANCE CO.LTD.M.A.LANE,
7. SUPPL.
8. SUPPL.
9. SUPPL.
10. SUPPL.
11. SUPPL.
For Petitioner :SRI.D.ANIL KUMAR
For Respondent :SRI.VPK.PANICKER
The Hon'ble MR. Justice J.B.KOSHY
The Hon'ble MR. Justice P.N.RAVINDRAN
Dated :26/06/2008
O R D E R
J.B. Koshy & P.N.Ravindran, JJ.
————————————–
M.F.A. No. 458 of 2003
—————————————
Dated this the 26th day of June, 2008
Judgment
Koshy,J.
Appellant/Claimant sustained injuries in an accident on
7.1.1994. He claimed an amount of Rs.Two lakhs as compensation.
Tribunal awarded only Rs.18,750/- as compensation. Only quantum
of compensation is disputed in this appeal. The tribunal found that
the accident occurred due to the negligence of the driver of the
autorickshaw owned by the fifth respondent and driver of the bus
owned by the second respondent and, therefore, compensation
amount was directed to be paid in equal proportion by third and
sixth respondent insurance companies, but, at the same time, since
the driver of the autorickshaw was not having a driving licence,
sixth respondent insurance company was directed to pay the
amount and and to recover the same by the insured. The only
question in dispute is regarding the quantum of compensation.
2. Claimant was an advocate’s clerk with few years’ of
practice. Rs.2,000/- was fixed as the monthly income. The accident
occurred in 1994. In the above circumstances, we are of the opinion
M.F.A.No. 458/2003 2
that no enhancement is required in the monthly income. As regards
the injuries are concerned, originally, he was admitted in the
Medical College Hospital, Thrissur. He was an inpatient there for six
days and there was suspected fracture of skull. Ext.A5 shows that
he was again admitted on 9.1.1994 and discharged on 14.1.1994.
He was admitted thereafter also. Ext.A6 discharge certificate shows
that there was fracture in the right patella and right radius. Medical
certificate shows that there is 7% disability. It is the contention of
the claimant that being an advocate’s clerk, fracture of forearm
really affects his work. He had a fracture of patella also which
makes problem consistently. He was aged 40 at the time of accident
and 16 is the multiplier taking guidance from the second schedule.
Taking all these aspects into consideration, we are of the view that
compensation ought to have been granted at least for 5% disability.
If that be so, compensation payable will be Rs.2000 x 12 x 5 x 16=
100
Rs.19,200/-. For actual loss of earning for one month, we award
another Rs.2,000/-. So, additional compensation payable will be
Rs.21,200/-. The above Rs.21,200/- should be deposited in equal
proportion by third and sixth respondents with 7% interest from the
date of application till its deposit over and above the amount
M.F.A.No. 458/2003 3
decreed by the tribunal. Sixth respondent insurance company will
be free to recover the amount paid from the fifth respondent, owner
of the autorickshaw, the insured in view of the violation of the policy
conditions.
The appeal is allowed partly.
J.B.Koshy
Judge
P.N.Ravindran
Judge
vaa
M.F.A.No. 458/2003 4
J.B. KOSHY
AND
P.N.RAVINDRAN,JJ.
————————————-
M.F.A. No. 458 of 2003
————————————-
Judgment
Dated:26th June, 2008