IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
MACA.No. 414 of 2006()
1. NIGESH A.V. S/O.VASU @ BHASKARAN,
... Petitioner
Vs
1. THE MANAGING DIRECTOR,K.S.R.T.C.
... Respondent
2. GIRIKUMAR, S/O.SANKARAN,
For Petitioner :SRI.NAGARAJ NARAYANAN
For Respondent :SRI.V.V.NANDAGOPAL NAMBIAR,SC, KSRTC
The Hon'ble MR. Justice A.K.BASHEER
The Hon'ble MR. Justice P.Q.BARKATH ALI
Dated :13/10/2010
O R D E R
A.K.BASHEER & P.Q. BARKATH ALI, JJ.
=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~==~=~=~=
M.A.C.A. No. 414 of 2006
=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~==~=~=~=
Dated this the 13th day of October, 2010
JUDGMENT
Barkath Ali, J.
Appellant is the claimant in O.P.(MV) No.366 of 2000
on the file of the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal,
Thiruvananthapuram. He sustained the following injuries in
a motor accident that occurred on November 18, 1999 at
about 2.30 p.m. near Vellayani Junction,
Thiruvananthapuram:-
1) Head Injury.
2) Multiple fractures involving the anterior,
medial and posterior lateral aspects of both
maxillary sinuses.
3) Blood in the both maxillary sinus and right
nasal cavity.
4) Soft tissue swelling right orbital region and
right maxilla area and left orbital region.
5) Fracture lateral wall of left orbit.
6) Fracture nasal bone right.
7) Fracture occipital bone in its lower part
extending up to the posterior boarder of
foramen magnum.
MACA 414/2006 2
8) Haemorrhagic contusion left parietal region.
9) Communited fracture olecranon right elbow.
10)Communited Fracture lower end of left
radius.
11) Loss of 6 nos. teeth (1 No. upper and 5 Nos.
lower jaw).
12) Ellis Class I Fracture upper Central Incisor.
2. The claimant was aged 22 at the time of the
accident and was earning Rs.6,000/- per month as a Medical
Representative in a company called “Astra Zenec, according
to him. The accident happened while he was riding a
scooter bearing registration No.KL-01-Q 8003, he was
knocked down by a K.S.R.T.C. bus bearing registration No.
KL-15/093. Alleging negligence against the 2nd respondent,
driver of the bus, the claimant filed the O.P. before the
Tribunal under section 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act
claiming a compensation of Rs.5 lakhs.
3. The 1st respondent, Managing Director of the
K.S.R.T.C. filed a written statement admitting the accident,
but denied the liability. The 2nd respondent, driver of the
MACA 414/2006 3
offending bus, remained absent before the Tribunal. PW1
was examined and Exts.A1 to A17 were marked on the side
of the claimant. No evidence was adduced by the
respondent. On an appreciation of the evidence, the
Tribunal found that the accident occurred due to negligence
of the 2nd respondent and awarded a compensation of
Rs.66,230/- with interest at 9% p.a. from the date of petition
till realization. The claimant has come up in appeal
challenging the quantum of compensation awarded by the
Tribunal.
4. Heard learned counsel for the claimant and
learned standing counsel for the K.S.R.T.C.
5. The accident is not disputed. The finding of the
Tribunal that the accident occurred due to the negligence of
the 2nd respondent is not seriously challenged in this
appeal. Therefore, the only question, which arises for
consideration, is whether the claimant is entitled to any
enhanced compensation.
6. The Tribunal awarded a total compensation of
MACA 414/2006 4
Rs.66,230/-. Break up of the compensation amount awarded
is as under:-
Loss of earnings : Rs. 12,000/-
Medical and incidental : Rs. 1,000/-
expenses .
Transportation : Rs. 1,000/-
Damage to clothing : Rs. 250/-
Extra nourishment : Rs. 1,000/-
Bystander's expenses : Rs. 1,500/-
Pain and suffering : Rs. 15,000/-
Permanent partial disability: Rs. 24,480/-:
Loss of amenities : Rs. 10,000/-
------------------
Total : Rs.66.230/-
========
7. Learned counsel for the claimant/claimant has
mainly sought enhancement of the compensation for the
disability caused.
8. The Tribunal took the monthly income of the
deceased as Rs.1,000/-, took the percentage of disability as
12%, adopted a multiplier of 17 and awarded a
compensation of Rs.24,480/- for the disability caused. For
assessing the loss of earnings, the Tribunal took the
MACA 414/2006 5
monthly income of the claimant as Rs.3,000/-. The claimant
was employed as a Medical Representative in a company
“Astra Zeneca” and used to earn Rs.3,500/-, as evidenced by
Ext.A16 salary certificate. Therefore, in our view, for
assessing loss of dependency also, his monthly income can
reasonably be taken as Rs.3,000/-. Percentage of disability
assessed by the Tribunal as 12% and multiplier adopted as
17 are found to be reasonable. Thus, calculated for the
disability caused, the claimant is entitled to a compensation
of Rs.73,440/- (Rs.3,000/- x 12 x 17 x 13%). Thus, the
claimant is entitled to an additional compensation of
Rs.48,960/- 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. In the result, the claimant is found entitled to an
additional compensation of Rs.48,960/-. He is entitled to
@ 9% from the date of petition till realization. The 1st
respondent shall deposit the amount within two months
from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment with
MACA 414/2006 6
notice to the claimant. The award of the Tribunal is
modified as above.
The appeal is disposed of as found above.
A.K.BASHEER,
JUDGE.
P.Q. BARKATH ALI,
JUDGE.
mn