IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
MACA.No. 750 of 2004()
1. T.M.ABOOBACKER, S/O. MARAKKAR,
... Petitioner
Vs
1. MATHEW PAUL,
... Respondent
2. C.P.ELDO, S/O. PAULOSE,
3. THE UNITED INDIA INSURANCE COMPANY LTD.,
4. THE NATIONAL INSURANCE COMPANY,
For Petitioner :SRI.P.K.MOHAMMED PUZHAKKARA
For Respondent :SRI.P.SANKARANKUTTY NAIR
The Hon'ble MR. Justice A.K.BASHEER
The Hon'ble MR. Justice P.Q.BARKATH ALI
Dated :15/07/2010
O R D E R
A.K.BASHEER & P.Q. BARKATH ALI, JJ.
=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=
M.A.C.A. No. 750 of 2004
=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=
Dated this the 15thday of July, 2010
JUDGMENT
Barkath Ali, J.
The appellant filed O.P.(MV) No.2202 of 1996 before
the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Ernakulam under
section 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act, claiming a
compensation of Rs.1,62,750/- for the loss caused to him, on
account of the injury sustained by him in a motor accident.
The Tribunal awarded a total compensation of Rs.47,250/-.
2. According to the appellant, he was riding his
scooter bearing registration No.KL-7K-3513 along
Kakkanad – Pallikkara road on October 5, 1995 at about
9.10 a.m. His wife, claimant in O.P.(MV) No.2203 of 1996,
was pillion riding. When they reached near the
Manakkakadavu Toll Gate, they were knocked down by a
bus bearing registration No.KRD 9144, which came from
the opposite side.
3. The claimant sustained the following injuries in the
MACA 750/2004 2
accident, as revealed from Ext.A9 wound certificate :-
1) Loss of consciousness.
2) Cerebral concussion.
3) Contusion (R) side of face. Extensive bruising
with contusion (L) upper arm. Contusions on
the lips.
4) Loss of one tooth and broken some of teeth.
5) Laceration – upper lip. Fracture (L) globellar
region extending from superomedial wall of
orbit to midline-undisplaced Le Foret II
fracture maxilla.
4. The O.P. was filed against respondents 1 to 3;
owner, driver and insurer of the offending bus. The insurer
of the scooter was subsequently impleaded as supplemental
respondent No. 4 before the Tribunal.
5. Respondents 1 and 2 remained absent and were set
ex parte by the Tribunal. The third respondent, insurer of
the offending bus, admitted the policy. The fourth
respondent, insurer of the scooter also admitted policy.
MACA 750/2004 3
6. This O.P. was jointly tried along with O.P.(MV) No.
2203 of 1996 filed by the wife of the claimant and a
common award was passed.
7. PWs.1 and 2 were examined and Exts. A1 to A26
were marked on the side of the claimant. No evidence was
adduced by the respondents. The Tribunal, on an
appreciation of the evidence, found that the accident
occurred due to the negligence on the part of the second
respondent, driver of the offending bus and awarded a total
compensation of Rs.47,250/- with interest at the rate of 9%
p.a. from the date of petition till realization and
proportionate cost. The claimant has come up in appeal
challenging the quantum of compensation awarded by the
Tribunal.
8. Heard the learned counsel for the claimant and
learned counsel for respondents 3 and 4.
9. 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, driver of the
MACA 750/2004 4
offending bus, is not challenged in this appeal. Therefore,
the only question, which arises for consideration, is whether
the claimant is entitled to any enhanced compensation?
10. The Tribunal awarded a total compensation of
Rs.47,250/-. Break up of the compensation awarded is as
under:-
Transport to hospital : Rs. 500/-
Damage to clothing : Rs. 250/-
Attendant expenses : Rs. 500/-
Extra nourishment : Rs. 1,000/-
Loss of earnings : Rs. 3,000/-
Medical and expenses : Rs. 9,000/-
Pain and suffering : Rs. 15,000/-
Loss of amenities : Rs. 10,000/-
Loss of one tooth and : Rs. 5,000/-
some teeth were broken.
For future treatment : Rs. 3,000/-
----------------------
Total ; Rs. 47,250/-
========
11. The learned counsel for the appellant/claimant
sought enhancement of compensation for pain and suffering
endured, loss of amenities and enjoyment in life and on
other heads. He pointed out that no compensation was
awarded for the disability caused.
MACA 750/2004 5
12. We find that no compensation was awarded for
the disability caused. The Tribunal awarded Rs.3,000/- for
the loss of earnings. The claimant was employed in
Kalamassery Premium Tyres as Lift Operator. Therefore, we
are of the view that his monthly income can reasonably be
fixed at Rs.2,500/-. Nature of the injuries sustained by him
show that he must have been disabled for three months, for
which he is entitled to a compensation of Rs.7,500/-. Thus,
on this count the claimant is entitled to an additional
compensation of Rs.4,500/-.
13. Towards medical expenses, the Tribunal awarded
a compensation of Rs.9,000/-. The claimant has produced
bills for Rs.10,620/-. Therefore, we feel that a compensation
of Rs.10,500/- would be reasonable on this count.
14. For the loss of amenities and enjoyment in life,
Rs.10,000/- was awarded by the Tribunal which is quite
inadequate. Having regard to the nature of the injuries
sustained, we feel that a compensation of Rs.20,000/- would
be reasonable on this count. As regards the compensation
MACA 750/2004 6
awarded under other heads, we find the same to be
reasonable and therefore, we are not disturbing the same.
15. Therefore, the claimant is entitled to an additional
compensation of Rs.16,000/-. He is entitled to interest at
the rate of 9% p.a. from the date of petition till realization
with proportionate cost. The third respondent, being the
insurer of the offending bus, shall deposit the amount
before the Tribunal within two months from the date of
receipt of a copy of this judgment with notice to the
claimant. The award of the Tribunal is modified to the above
extent.
In the result, the appeal is disposed of as found
above.
A.K.BASHEER,
JUDGE.
P.Q. BARKATH ALI,
JUDGE.
mn MACA 750/2004 7