IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
MFA No. 1265 of 2000(B)
1. SANJU THOMAS
... Petitioner
Vs
1. M.SIRAJUDEEN
... Respondent
For Petitioner :SRI.V.N.ACHUTHA KURUP
For Respondent :SRI.ANCHAL C.VIJAYAN
The Hon'ble MR. Justice J.B.KOSHY
The Hon'ble MR. Justice K.T.SANKARAN
Dated :18/03/2008
O R D E R
J.B. KOSHY & K.T. SANKARAN, JJ.
...................................................................................
M.F.A.NO. 1265 OF 2000
...................................................................................
Dated this the 18th March, 2008
J U D G M E N T
Koshy, J.:
The appellant/claimant sustained serious injuries in a motor accident
occurred on 16.10.1993. While he was riding his motor cycle, it hit with a lorry
driven by the first respondent and insured by the second respondent, Insurance
Company. The Tribunal, after considering Ext.A2, report of A.M.V.I. and Ext.A4
Scene Mahazar found that the right side of the lorry was hit by the motor cycle
and the motor cycle was coming on the wrong side and therefore both drivers
were negligent. However, since the motor cycle is a small vehicle, the Tribunal
limited the extent of contribution of the claimant to the accident at 25%. It is
true that only the first respondent-lorry driver was charge sheeted. But at the
same time, the description in the Scene Mahazar shows that the motor cycle hit
on the right side of the lorry when the motor cycle was coming from the
opposite direction. Hit on the right side of the lorry shows that the appellant was
riding the motor cycle in a rash manner. But lorry was also coming in a high
speed. In the circumstances, the finding of the Tribunal to limit the extent of
contribution to 25% does not call for any interference.
2. With regard to the quantum of compensation granted, it has to be
taken into account that the appellant was 19 years at the time of accident and
M.F.A.NO. 1265 OF 2000
2
that he was an engineering student. The Tribunal accepted the medical
certificates produced by the appellant/claimant. For assessing the
compensation, the Tribunal has taken Rs. 2000/- p.m. as average income of the
claimant and granted Rs.1000/- towards transport to hospital, Rs.2500/-
towards extra nourishment, Rs.500/- towards damage to clothing and Rs.1500/-
towards by-stander’s expenses and Rs.10000/- towards medical expenses.
3. The injuries sustained by the claimant are the following:
“1) Fracture skull with lacerated wound 5 x 1 x 2 cm suterated
2) Fracture of base of skull
3) Fracture sygoma right with lacerated wound 4 x 2 x 1 c.m.
4) Fracture maxilla on both side of face
5) Fracture mandible right suboondylar.
6) Fracture mandible left paramedia.
7) Fracture nasal bone
8) Fracture trimolar right with depression.
9) Fracture right orbit.
10) Fracture right radious with nailing of radious immobilised
with plaster.
11) Removal of lower end of ulna
12) Multiple laceration right knee with bone exposed right leg
was immobilised with plaster
13) Multiple contused abrasion right leg.
14) Lacerated wound right and left tongue which sutures
15) injury on the right thigh with permanent mark
16) Injury on the right ankle
M.F.A.NO. 1265 OF 2000
3
17) Injury in the right shoulder
18) Face is disfigured.
The above injuries were proved by the medical records, Exts. A6 to A10. The
appellant/claimant had produced the actual medical bills amounting to
Rs.11,469/-. The Tribunal had granted only Rs.10,000/- for medical expenses.
There would be many expenses not covered by the medical bills. In the above
circumstances, considering the nature of injuries sustained by the
appellant/claimant, we grant Rs.5000/- as additional compensation.
4. The following disabilities were noted by the Department of Oral and
Maxilio Facial Surgery, Medical College, Trivandrum. They are:
“1. Facial disfigurement and chewing limitation.(Partial
permanent disability of 5%.
2. Unsightedly scar on the right side of middle of forehead and
left lower part of cheek. (Partial permanent disability of 5%
considering the psycologic impact to such a young patient)
3. Fracture of one teeth -21-1% ( One percent)”
The claimant had undergone for maxilio facial surgery. The Tribunal did not
award any compensation for loss of amenities, loss of studies and towards dis-
figuration. In these circumstances, for dis-figuration, loss of amenities and loss
of studies, we award Rs.7,000/- more as additional compensation. Hence, total
additional compensation of Rs.12,000/- is granted to the claimant. Since we
confirm the findings of the Tribunal limiting the extent of contribution of the
M.F.A.NO. 1265 OF 2000
4
appellant/claimant to the accident at 25%, the actual additional compensation
payable to the claimant is Rs.9,000/-. Over and above the amount awarded by
the Tribunal, the additional compensation granted by this Court should be
deposited by the second respondent-Insurance Company with 7.5% interest
from the date of application till its deposit. On deposit of the amount, the
appellant/claimant is allowed to withdraw the same.
J.B. KOSHY,
JUDGE.
K.T. SANKARAN,
JUDGE.
lk
M.F.A.NO. 1265 OF 2000
5
J.B. KOSHY &
K.T. SANKARAN, JJ.
………………………………………………..
M.F.A. No. 1265 OF 2000
…………………………………………………
Dated this the 18th March, 2008
J U D G M E N T