High Court Kerala High Court

Vinod vs Haji.N.K.Abdeen on 28 June, 2010

Kerala High Court
Vinod vs Haji.N.K.Abdeen on 28 June, 2010
       

  

  

 
 
  IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

MACA.No. 964 of 2004()


1. VINOD, S/O.GOPALAKRISHNAN,
                      ...  Petitioner

                        Vs



1. HAJI.N.K.ABDEEN,
                       ...       Respondent

2. MUHAMMAED KUNJU, S/O.KUTTY,

3. THE UNITED INDIA INSURANCE COMPANY LTD.,

                For Petitioner  :SRI.N.RAGHURAJ

                For Respondent  :SRI.THOMAS MATHEW NELLIMOOTTIL

The Hon'ble MR. Justice A.K.BASHEER
The Hon'ble MR. Justice P.Q.BARKATH ALI

 Dated :28/06/2010

 O R D E R
              A.K.BASHEER & P.Q.BARKATH ALI, JJ.
                       - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
                         M.A.C.A.No.964 OF 2004
                   - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
                     Dated this the 28th day of June, 2010

                                 JUDGMENT

Barkath Ali, J.

In this appeal under Section 173 of Motor Vehicles Act, the

claimant in O.P.(MV)No.1584/1996 of Motor Accidents Claims

Tribunal, Alappuzha challenges the judgment and award of the

Tribunal dated June 3, 2003 awarding a compensation of Rs. 50,000/-

for the loss caused to him on account of the injuries sustained by him in

a motor accident.

2. The facts leading to this appeal in brief are these :

The claimant was aged 18 at the time of the accident and was

employed as a Gold Smith in Asha Jwellery, Alappuzha. On March

25, 1996 at about 7.30 a.m. near Aiswarya Auditorium, Mullakkal,

Alappuzha, claimant was cycling along the side of the road. Claimant

in O.P.(MV)No.1583/1996 was pillion riding on the cycle. At that

time, a Matador Van bearing Reg.No.K.B.F-486 driven by the second

respondent came at a high speed from the opposite side and knocked

them down. Claimant as well as the pillion rider sustained serious

MACA.No.964/2004 2

injuries. According to the claimant, accident occurred due to the rash

and negligent riding of the offending Matador Van by second

respondent. First respondent as the owner, second respondent as the

driver and third respondent as the insurer of the offending Matador

Van are jointly and severally liable to pay compensation to the

claimant. Claimant claimed a compensation of Rs. 1,50,000/-.

3. Respondents 1 and 2, the owner and driver of the offending

vehicle remained absent and were set ex parte by the Tribunal. The

third respondent the insurer of the offending van filed a written

statement admitting the policy, but contended that actually the

offending vehicle is a Maruthi car and not the Matador van as alleged

by the claimant.

4. This O.P. was jointly tried along with O.P.(MV)

No.1583/1996 filed by the pillion rider of the bicycle and a common

award was passed. Pws 1 and 2 were examined and Exts.A1 to A17

were marked on the side of the claimant before the Tribunal. No

evidence was adduced by the contesting third respondent. The

Tribunal on an appreciation of evidence found that the accident

occurred due to the rash and negligent driving of the offending van by

second respondent and awarded a compensation of Rs. 50,000/- with

MACA.No.964/2004 3

interest @ 6% per annum from the date of petition till realisation and

proportionate cost. 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, copy of the wound certificate issued from Medical

College Hospital, Alappuzha.

Abrasion ( L) foot ( L) knee
Lacerated wound chin 3 x 1 cm.

Fracture ( R) femur ( L) tibia.

8. Ext.A6 is the discharge card issued from the hospital.

Open reduction and ‘K’ nail fixation was done. Ext.A12, the certificate

of disability, shows that the claimant has a permanent disability of

18%.

MACA.No.964/2004 4

9. The Tribunal awarded a total compensation of Rs.50,000/-.

The break up of the compensation awarded is as under :

      Loss of earning              - Rs. 9,000/-
      Treatment expenses           - Rs. 4,000/-
      Pain and suffering           - Rs. 10,000/-
      Disability                   - Rs. 21,000/-
      Loss of earning power        - Rs. 6,000/-

      10.   Counsel   for  the   claimant    sought   enhancement   of

compensation for the disability caused and for loss of earning.

11. The Tribunal took the monthly income of the claimant as

Rs.1500/-. Taking into consideration the fact that claimant was a Gold

Smith, we feel that his monthly income can be reasonably fixed at

Rs. 2,000/-.

12. The Tribunal awarded Rs.9,000/- for loss of earning for six

months @ Rs. 1,500/- per month. As we have fixed the monthly

income of the claimant as Rs. 2,000/-, the claimant is entitled to a

compensation for Rs. 12,000/- towards loss of earning. Thus on this

count, the claimant is entitled to an additional compensation of

Rs.3,000/-. As regards the compensation awarded under other heads,

we find the same to be reasonable and therefore are not disturbing the

same.

13. There is another aspect in this case. The Tribunal awarded

MACA.No.964/2004 5

interest only @ 6% per annum which is very low. The claimant is

entitled to interest @ 7.5% per annum from the date of petition till

realisation for the compensation already awarded and also for the

enhanced compensation.

14. In the result, the claimant is entitled to an additional

compensation of Rs. 3,000/-. He is entitled to interest @ 7.5% per

annum from the date of petition till realisation for the compensation

already awarded and also for the enhanced compensation. He is also

entitled to 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.964/2004 6