High Court Kerala High Court

Mathew George vs Nalolikkal Sibi @ Joseph on 17 May, 2010

Kerala High Court
Mathew George vs Nalolikkal Sibi @ Joseph on 17 May, 2010
       

  

  

 
 
  IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

MACA.No. 344 of 2006(A)


1. MATHEW GEORGE, S/O.GEORGE,
                      ...  Petitioner

                        Vs



1. NALOLIKKAL SIBI @ JOSEPH, S/O.JOSEPH,
                       ...       Respondent

2. M.G.BINDU, MUDAPLAKKAL HOUSE,

3. ORIENTAL INSURANCE COMPANY LTD.,

                For Petitioner  :SRI.H.BADARUDDIN

                For Respondent  :SRI.M.JACOB MURICKAN

The Hon'ble MR. Justice A.K.BASHEER

 Dated :17/05/2010

 O R D E R
             A.K.BASHEER & P.Q.BARKATH ALI, JJ.
                       - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
                         M.A.C.A. No.344 OF 2006
                   - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
                     Dated this the 17th day of May, 2010

                                 JUDGMENT

Barkath Ali, J.

In this appeal under Section 173 of Motor Vehicles Act, the

claimant in O.P.(MV)No.2/2000 of Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal,

Thalassery challenges the judgment and award of the Tribunal dated

August 5, 2005 awarding a compensation of Rs. 77,750/- for the loss

caused to him on account of the injuries sustained in a motor accident.

2. The facts leading to this appeal in brief are these :

The claimant was an agriculturist aged 28 earning Rs. 4,000/- per

month, according to him. On April 21, 1999 at about 9.30 p.m., the

claimant was travelling in an auto rickshaw bearing Reg.No.KL13/D

3488. When he reached at a place called Marottichodu, due to the rash

and negligent driving of the auto rickshaw by first respondent, it over

turned on the road. The claimant sustained serious injuries. According

to the claimant, accident occurred due to the rash and negligent driving

of the offending auto rickshaw by first respondent. First respondent as

MACA.No.344/2006 2

the driver, second respondent as the owner and third respondent as the

insurer of the offending auto rickshaw are jointly and severally liable to

pay compensation to the claimant. Claimant claimed a compensation

of Rs. 3 lakhs.

3. Respondents 1 and 2, the driver and owner of the offending

auto rickshaw remained absent and were set ex parte by the Tribunal.

The third respondent the insurer of the offending auto rickshaw filed a

written statement admitting the policy.

4. Claimant was examined as PW1 and Exts.A1 to A7 series

were marked on the side of the claimant before the Tribunal. No

evidence was adduced by the contesting third respondent. The

Tribunal on an appreciation of evidence found that the accident

occurred due to the rash and negligent driving of the offending auto

rickshaw by first respondent and awarded a compensation of

Rs.77,750/- with interest @ 9% per annum and cost. 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

MACA.No.344/2006 3

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 first

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. The claimant sustained the following injuries as revealed

from Ext.A3, the copy of the wound certificate. :

1. Compound fracture and dislocation of left
ankle.

2. Contused and lacerated wound 3 x 1 cm.

bone deep on the medial aspect of right leg.

3. Contused abrasion of 3 cm. x 1 cm. left side
of forehead above the eye braw.

4. Lacerated abrasion 2 cm. x 1 cm. on the
right shoulder.

5. Abrasion of 1 = cm. long on the lateral
aspect of right thigh.

8. Ext.A4 series are the two discharge cards issued from

Kasturba Medical College Hospital, Manipal which shows that

claimant has suffered fracture /dislocation of left ankle.

9. The Tribunal awarded a total compensation of Rs.77,750/-.

The break up of the compensation awarded is as under :

MACA.No.344/2006 4

      Loss of earning                     - Rs. 6,000/-
      Medical expense including bills     - Rs.29,600/-
      Transportation expense
      including ambulance bill            - Rs. 6,000/-
      Bystanders expense                  - Rs. 2,000/-
      Extra nourishment                   - Rs. 1,500/-
      Loss of earning capacity            - Rs. 32,640/-
      ( 2000 x 12 x 17 x 8%)              -----------------
                       Total              - Rs.77,740/-
               Rounded off to             - Rs.77,750/-
                                          =========

10. Counsel for the appellant sought enhancement of

compensation for the disability caused. Ext.A5, the disability

certificate issued by Dr.Bhaskaranand Kumar, Kasturba Medical

College, Manipal shows that the claimant has the following

disabilities :

1. Post traumatic ankylosis of left ankle joint

with no planter fixation of dorsiflexion

movements.

2. Post traumatic osteoarthrosis of left ankle

joint with 10 degree valgus deformity.

3. Shortening of left lower limb – 1 cm.

11. His percentage of disability was assessed at 30%. The

MACA.No.344/2006 5

Tribunal took the monthly income of the claimant as Rs.2,000/- and

took the percentage of disability at 8% and adopted a multiplier of 17

and awarded Rs. 32,640/- for the disability caused. Taking into

consideration the disabilities mentioned in Ext.A5, we feel that the

percentage of disability suffered by the claimant can be fixed at 12%.

Claimant as PW1 also testified that he is an agriculturist . Therefore,

we feel that his monthly income can be reasonably fixed at Rs. 2,500/-.

The multiplier adopted by the Tribunal as 17 is not seriously

challenged. Thus calculated for the disability caused, the claimant is

entitled to a compensation of Rs. 61,200/- ( 12 % x 2500 x 12 x 17).

Thus on this count, the claimant is entitled to an additional

compensation of Rs.28,560/-. As regards the compensation awarded

under other heads, we find the same to be reasonable and therefore are

not disturbing the same.

12. In the result, the claimant is found entitled to an additional

compensation of Rs. 28,560/-. He is entitled to interest @ 9% per

annum from the date of petition till realisation and proportionate cost.

The third respondent being the insurer of the offending vehicle shall

MACA.No.344/2006 6

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

sv.

MACA.No.344/2006 7