Loading...

P.P.Ravi vs K.Shivadas on 13 August, 2009

Kerala High Court
P.P.Ravi vs K.Shivadas on 13 August, 2009
       

  

  

 
 
  IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

MACA.No. 1969 of 2006()


1. P.P.RAVI, AGED 48 YEARS,
                      ...  Petitioner

                        Vs



1. K.SHIVADAS, S/O.CANDUKUTTY,
                       ...       Respondent

2. UNNIKRISHNAN T.V.,

3. THE UNITED INDIA INSURANCE COMPANY LTD.,

                For Petitioner  :SRI.M.SASINDRAN

                For Respondent  :SRI.S.ARUN RAJ

The Hon'ble MR. Justice K.M.JOSEPH
The Hon'ble MR. Justice M.L.JOSEPH FRANCIS

 Dated :13/08/2009

 O R D E R
     K.M. JOSEPH & M. L. JOSEPH FRANCIS, JJ.

            - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
                 M.A.C.A. NO: 1969 OF 2006
            - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

           Dated this the 13th Day of August, 2009.

                             JUDGMENT

K. M. Joseph J.

The appellant is the claimant in a petition filed under Section

166 of the Motor Vehicles Act. The appellant claimed

compensation of Rs.4 lakhs and he is awarded Rs.1,09,000/-

(rounded of figure). Aggrieved by the adequacy of compensation

awarded, this petition is filed.

2. We heard the learned counsel for the appellant and the

learned counsel for the Insurance Company.

3. Learned counsel for the appellant would point out that the

appellant is working as an Assistant in Life Insurance Corporation

of India. He was drawing a monthly salary of Rs.10,017/-. He has

produced his salary certificate as Ext.A10. However, in calculating

the disability of compensation, the Tribunal has taken only

M.A.C.A . NO: 1969 OF 2006
:2:

Rs.1,500/- as his monthly income. Further, it is complained that the

Tribunal without any reason has fixed the disability at 5%. By

Ext.A13 the disability of the appellant has been fixed at 12%. It is

further pointed out that only Rs.15,000/- is awarded towards pain

and suffering. Rs.5,000/- is awarded towards loss of amenities.

Rs.5,000/- awarded only towards disfigurement.

4. Learned counsel for the respondent supported the award.

5. The first question to be considered is what is the income

and what is the percentage of disability to be considered for

calculating the disability. The appellant is employed with Life

Insurance Corporation of India and drawing monthly salary with

other allowances. The disability, if at all, will arise after retirement.

In such circumstances the multiplier to be taken is 8. We feel that,

in the nature of the employment in which the appellant is engaged,

we can accept as Rs.2,500/- per month as the income. It is true that

the Tribunal has given some reason for reducing the percentage of

disability from 12% to 5%. The Tribunal in particular opines that

M.A.C.A . NO: 1969 OF 2006
:3:

the occupational disability of the appellant is not assessed. PW2 is

the doctor who examined the appellant. He would say that the

appellant has difficulty in alighting, driving and speaking etc. The

index finger has partial anklyon at MCP joint, middle and ring

finger right hand. It is not specified as to whether it is proximal

or distial. Nonetheless there is a medical certificate issued by

Medical Board. The certificate would show that the appellant

was having partial ankylosis right wrist, 10 degree short of full

extension and 30 degree terminal limitation of flexion. Partial

anklyon at MCP joint of index finger. No doubt the wound scar

may not affect the earning capacity as such. On this basis, the

disability can be fixed at 8% instead of 5%. The appellant

would be entitled to a sum of Rs.19,200/- in place of

Rs.12,000/- awarded. Thus the appellant is entitled to

Rs.7,200/- more under the said head.

6. The appellant was in hospital for 59 days. According

M.A.C.A . NO: 1969 OF 2006
:4:

to the appellant, he underwent 4 surgeries. We feel that in the

nature of the injuries and also the treatment he underwent, the

appellant should have been awarded a sum of Rs.20,000/-

towards pain and suffering. We also feel that in the nature of

injuries and the after effects of the incident, the appellant should

be awarded Rs.10,000/- towards loss of amenities. The

appellant would be entitled to a sum of Rs.22,200/- more.

Accordingly this appeal is allowed and the appellant is

allowed to realise a sum of Rs.22,200/- more along with interest

at the rate of 7.5% from the date of petition till the date of

realisation from the third respondent.

K. M. JOSEPH, JUDGE

M. L. JOSEPH FRANCIS, JUDGE

dl/

Leave a Comment

Your email address will not be published.

* Copy This Password *

* Type Or Paste Password Here *

Cookies help us deliver our services. By using our services, you agree to our use of cookies. More Information