IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
MACA.No. 272 of 2004()
1. M.T. YOOSUF, S/O. MOHAMED,
... Petitioner
Vs
1. MOORPANTHODI ABDURAHIMAN,
... Respondent
2. V. MANUKUTTAN, S/O. SANKARAN,
3. NEW INDIA ASSURANCE COMPANY LTD.,
For Petitioner :SRI.V.V.ASOKAN
For Respondent :SRI.K.M.SATHYANATHA MENON
The Hon'ble MR. Justice M.N.KRISHNAN
Dated :18/09/2008
O R D E R
M.N.KRISHNAN, J.
--------------------------
M.A.C.A. No. 272 OF 2004
---------------------
Dated this the 18thday of September, 2008
JUDGMENT
This appeal is preferred against the award passed by the Motor
Accident Claims Tribunal, Manjeri, in OP(MV) 1148/99. The claimant,
aged 31 years, sustained injuries in a motor vehicle accident. He had
suffered fracture of the left tibia and fibula. He had undergone inpatient
treatment for 9 days in the Medical College Hospital, Kozhikode and
thereafter was treated again for a period of 5 days. The Tribunal awarded
him a total compensation of Rs.26,300/-. The Tribunal had also
exonerated the Insurance Company from the liability on the ground that he
was a gratuitous passenger in a goods vehicle. Assailing the finding
regarding quantum of compensation and exoneration of the Insurance
Company from the liability, the claimant has come up in appeal.
2. Heard the counsel appearing for the appellant, owner and
Insurance Company. So far as quantum of compensation is concerned,
the Tribunal has granted reasonable compensation for loss of earnings,
pain and suffering, medical expenses, transport expenses and extra
nourishment. It has to be remembered that the accident is of the year
1995. There is no document to show that there was any disability for the
person. But it is certain that when a person sustains fracture of the tibia
and fibula and as he had undergone inpatient treatment in the hospital on
MACA No. 272/04 2
two occasions, there would have been loss of amenities and enjoyment in
life for him. So taking into consideration that aspect, I award a sum of
Rs.5,000/- under that head.
3. The next contention is regarding the exoneration of the
Insurance Company from the liability. The claimant attempted to project a
case that he was a pedestrian hit by an autorickshaw. The Tribunal found
that petitioner himself admitted that he was travelling in the goods
autorickshaw involved in the accident. He has no case that he was the
owner of the goods or representative of the owner of the goods
accompanying the same. Therefore as per the decision reported in New
India Assurance Co. Ltd. v. Asha Rani [2003 (1) KLT 165 (SC)] the
Insurance Company cannot be mulcted with the liability. So the said
finding of the Tribunal does not call for any interference.
In the result, the MACA is partly allowed and the claimant is
entitled to an additional compensation of Rs.5,000/- with 7 % interest on
the said sum from the date of petition till realisation. Respondents 1 and 2
are jointly and severally liable to pay the amount within a period of 60 days
from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment.
M.N.KRISHNAN, JUDGE
vps
MACA No. 272/04 3