IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
MACA.No. 324 of 2006()
1. SIDHIQUE, S/O.BEERAN,
... Petitioner
Vs
1. JESSY VINCENT,
... Respondent
2. SIVARAMAN, S/O.DASSARADHAN,
3. THE ORIENTAL INSURANCE CO. LTD.,
4. THE ORIENTAL INSURANCE CO. LTD.,
5. C.E.NAZAR, CHEMBIL HOUSE,
For Petitioner :SRI.R.RENJITH
For Respondent :SRI.GEORGE CHERIAN (THIRUVALLA)
The Hon'ble MR. Justice J.B.KOSHY
The Hon'ble MR. Justice K.P.BALACHANDRAN
Dated :17/09/2008
O R D E R
J.B.KOSHY & K.P.BALACHANDRAN, JJ.
-------------------------------
M.A.C.A.NO.324 OF 2006 (A)
-----------------------------------
Dated this the 17th day of September, 2008
J U D G M E N T
KOSHY,J.
Appellant/claimant sustained serious injuries in a motor
vehicle accident on 28.4.2000. Tribunal found that the
accident occurred due to the negligence of the driver of the
vehicle insured by the 3rd respondent Insurance company.
However, the compensation calculated was directed to be
paid by the 3rd and 4th respondents Insurance companies in
equal proportion. Only dispute is regarding the quantum of
compensation. As against a claim of Rs.5,00,000/-, only
Rs.2,18,775/- was awarded as compensation.
2. Appellant was a head load worker. Ext.A10 is the
attested copy of the identity card issued by the Assistant
Labour Officer which shows that he was a registered head
load worker. He claimed Rs.3,500/- as the monthly income.
It is also contended that he was getting more than Rs.150/-
per day. Even if he was getting Rs.100/- per day and he will
MACA.324/06 2
get atleast 25 days work in a month, monthly income can be
assessed as Rs.2,500/-, but Tribunal has fixed only Rs.1,500/-
as the monthly income. We fix Rs.2,500/- as the monthly
income. Medical Board certified that there is 17% disability.
Disability certificate issued by the Medical Board is as follows:
“Today, we the members of the Medical Board,
examined Sri.Sidhik, 34 years, whose
signature is given above for assessment of
disabilities, if any, following an R.T.A. on
28.4.2000. He was a Head Load worker. He
was treated initially at Medical Trust Hospital
and then at Sri.Balaji Hospital, Coimbatore.
As per the case study and treatment
certificate, he had compound fracture of B(L)
leg with degloving injury of left leg. Now he
had complaints of
1. Cannot walk without crutches.
2. Numbness of left leg.
3. Pain on leg while weight bearing.
4. Difficulty to squat and climb stairs.
On examination:-
100 anterior angulation of right leg and loss of
sensation on the post anterior aspect of left
leg and anterior leg.
-Ankle extension 150 short.
-Knee flexion is only 900.
X-Ray left leg shows malunited # BB mid 1/3.
Based on the above findings his orthopedic
disability is assessed to be 17% (Seventeen) as
per McBride guidelines.”
MACA.324/06 3
There is no reason to disbelieve the disability assessed by the
Medical Board. He was inpatient for 90 days in the hospital.
He was 34 years old at the time of accident. Tribunal has
taken 17 as the multiplier. Taking guidelines from the
2nd Schedule, no enhancement is required in the multiplier.
Therefore, compensation payable for 17% disability will be
Rs.2,500 x 12 x 17/100 x 17 = Rs.86,700/-. Tribunal has
awarded only an amount of Rs.24,480/- towards disability.
Therefore, additional amount payable for disability will be
Rs.62,220/-. Tribunal found that he was unable to do any work
for six months during the period of treatment. Tribunal has
awarded Rs.9,000/- towards loss of earning for six months
taking Rs.1,500/- as the monthly income. Since we have
enhanced the monthly income to Rs.2,500/-, he is entitled to
an additional amount of Rs.6,000/-. It is contended that he
was treated in Medical Trust Hospital, Ernakulam, Specialist
Hospital and thereafter in Balaji Hospital, Coimbatore. After
90 days of inpatient treatment, he had to go several times to
various hospitals for treatment and physiotherapy. He is
unable to do head load work even now. All the medical
records were produced. It is submitted that only actual bills
MACA.324/06 4
were reimbursed even though there will be many incidental
expenses which are not reflected by the bills. He had to go
several times to the hospital for treatment and consultation
apart from 90 days inpatient treatment. It is also submitted
that for attendant expenses only Rs.4,000/- was awarded even
though he was inpatient for three months and for the entire
period of treatment, he required an assistance. We are of the
view that Rs.12,000/- more ought have been awarded
considering the transportation expenses, medical expenses
and attendant expenses. Therefore, additional amount
payable will be Rs.80,220 rounded to Rs.80,000/-. The above
amount of Rs.80,000/- should be deposited by the 3rd and
4th respondents Insurance companies in equal proportion after
deducting the amount already deposited. On deposit of the
amount, appellant is allowed to withdraw the same. Appeal is
accordingly partly allowed.
J.B.KOSHY, JUDGE
K.P.BALACHANDRAN, JUDGE
prp
MACA.324/06 5
J.B.KOSHY & K.P.BALACHANDRAN, JJ.
——————————————————–
M.F.A.NO. OF 2006 ()
———————————————————
J U D G M E N T
———————————————————
17th September, 2008