IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
MACA.No. 1636 of 2008()
1. P.KANNAN, S/O.PARAMESWARAN MOOTHATHU,
... Petitioner
Vs
1. SHERLY SAJAN ALAPPAT, STARVILLA,
... Respondent
2. SHIBU.S, S/O.SANTHAKUMAR,
3. THE NEW INDIA ASSURANCE COMPANY LTD.
4. M.VELUSWAMY, S/O.MUTHUSWAMY,
5. M.APPUSWAMY, S/O.MUTHUSWAMY, POTTANAGARI
6. UNITED INDIA INSURANCE CO.
For Petitioner :SRI.B.PREMNATH (E)
For Respondent :SRI.VIJU THOMAS
The Hon'ble MR. Justice A.K.BASHEER
The Hon'ble MR. Justice P.Q.BARKATH ALI
Dated :26/05/2010
O R D E R
A.K.BASHEER & P.Q.BARKATH ALI, JJ.
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
M.A.C.A.No.1636 OF 2008
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Dated this the 26th 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.819/2000 of Motor Accidents Claims
Tribunal, Ernakulam challenges the judgment and award of the
Tribunal dated April 13, 2007 awarding a compensation of Rs. 23,820/-
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 aged 30 at the time of accident and used to earn
Rs.4,000/- per month as a professional Kathakali artist, according to the
claimant. On January 2, 1999 at about 6.00 a.m., he was travelling in
an Ambassador car bearing Reg.No.KL-01/L-9207 driven by the
second respondent. When they reached at Muthoor, Thiruvalla on the
M.C. Road, the car dashed against the back side of a lorry bearing
Reg.No.TN-27-3399 which was parked on the western side of the road.
MACA.No.1636/2008 2
The claimant as well as another passenger sustained serious injuries.
According to the claimant, accident occurred due to the rash and
negligent driving of the offending car by second respondent. First
respondent as the owner, second respondent as the driver and third
respondent as the insurer of the offending car are jointly and severally
liable to pay compensation to the claimant. Respondents 4 to 6 are the
owner, driver and insurer of the lorry. Claimant claimed a
compensation of Rs. 3,63,000/-.
3. Respondents 3 and 6, the insurers of the vehicles filed
separate written statements admitting the policy and attributing
negligence to the driver of the other vehicle. Other respondents
remained absent and were set ex-parte by the Tribunal.
4. This O.P. was jointly tried along with O.P.No.3397/199
filed by another passenger who sustained injuries. The claimants in
both the cases were examined as Pws 1 and 2 and Exts.A1 to 21 were
marked on their side. No evidence was adduced by contesting
respondents 3 and 6. The Tribunal on an appreciation of evidence
awarded a compensation of Rs. 23,820/- with interest @ 7.5% per
annum from the date of petition till realisation and proportionate cost.
MACA.No.1636/2008 3
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
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
second 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.A5, the copy of the wound certificate and Ext.A16 discharge
card issued from the Medical College Hospital, Kottayam.
He had injury on the eyelid upper left, splitting the
eye lid. It was sutured by the Opthalmologist. He had
extensor tendon injury on the right middle finger and
fracture dislocation of left little finger. He underwent
immediate tracheostomy.
8. The Tribunal awarded a total compensation of Rs.23,820/-.
The break up of the compensation awarded is as under :
MACA.No.1636/2008 4
Medical expenses - Rs. 1,820/-
Transportation, damage to clothes,
extra nourishment & attendant
expenses ( 1,000/-, 250/-, 1250/- &
1500/- respectively) - Rs. 4,000/-
Shock, pain and suffering - Rs.10,000/-
Loss of earning for one month - Rs. 5,000/-
Loss of amenities and convenience - Rs. 3,000/-
---------------
Total - Rs. 23,820/-
=========
9. Counsel for the claimant sought enhancement of the
compensation for the loss of amenities and pain and suffering endured
and for loss of earning.
10. The Tribunal awarded Rs.3,000/- for loss of amenities and
convenience. Taking into consideration the nature of the injury
sustained, we feel that a compensation of Rs. 15,000/- would be
reasonable on this count.
11. For the shock, pain and suffering endured, the Tribunal
awarded Rs. 10,000/- which appears to be very low. Having regard to
the nature of the injury sustained, we feel that a compensation of
MACA.No.1636/2008 5
Rs. 20,000/- would be reasonable on this count.
12. The Tribunal awarded Rs. 5,000/- for loss of earning for
one month which appears to be very low. The nature of the injury
sustained by the claimant shows that he must have been disabled atleast
for two months. Therefore, towards loss of earning, we feel that a
compensation of Rs. 10,000/- would be reasonable. As regards the
compensation awarded under other heads, we find the same to be
reasonable and therefore are not disturbing the same.
In the result, the claimant is found entitled to an additional
compensation of Rs. 27,000/-. He is entitled to interest @ 7.5% per
annum from the date of petition till realisation and proportionate cost.
The third respondent being the insurer of the 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.
A.K.BASHEER, JUDGE
P.Q.BARKATH ALI, JUDGE
sv.
MACA.No.1636/2008 6
MACA.No.1636/2008 7