High Court of KeralaDivision Bench2015-01-21Appeal allowed; no costs; enhanced compensation...

A. Venugopalan v. M.B. Madhu and United India Insurance Company Limited

Case / Petition Number:MACA.No.2515 of 2014

Case Details & Bench

Court: High Court of Kerala
Hon'ble Judges: T. R. Ramachandran Nair
P. V. Asha
Judgment Date: 2015-01-21
Court Decision / Holding: The High Court allowed the appeal and modified the award. It directed inclusion of the duplicate hospital bill (Rs. 30,132.60) in medical expenses, assessed the appellant’s monthly income at Rs. 4,500 for six months, and increased several heads: loss of earnings to Rs. 27,000, transport to hospital to Rs. 2,000, extra nourishment Rs. 1,000, damage to clothes Rs. 500, attendant expenses Rs. 2,750, treatment expenses Rs. 30,832.60, pain and suffering Rs. 30,000, continuing/partial disability Rs. 23,760, and future treatment Rs. 7,500, culminating in a total of Rs. 1,25,300 (rounding adjustments noted). Interest at 9% per annum was awarded from the date of petition, with a three-month period for deposit. The appeal was allowed and No costs were awarded to either party.
Final Disposition: Appeal allowed; no costs; enhanced compensation; 9% interest; deposit within three months; corrigendum later issued.

Parties to the Case

Appellants / Petitioners

A. Venugopalan

Respondents

M.B. Madhu
The Manager United India Insurance Company Limited

Legal Representation & Advocates

Counsels for Petitioners

• Sri P. M. Joshi
• Smt. Siji K. Paul

Counsels for Respondents

• Sri P. V. Jyothi Prasad
• Sri John Joseph Vettikad

Case Synopsis & Summary

The appellant, A. Venugopalan, was injured in a motor vehicle accident on 08.10.2008 when a motorcycle struck him as he walked along the Irumpanam–Karingachira road. A coolie by occupation, he claimed monthly earnings of Rs. 5,000 and sought compensation totaling Rs. 2,65,000 (later restricted to Rs. 2 lakhs) before the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal (MACT). The Tribunal awarded Rs. 62,320 in total compensation, with Rs. 700 for medical expenses and Rs. 16,000 for loss of earnings, while other heads were inadequately addressed. The appellant challenged the award before the Kerala High Court, arguing that duplicate hospital bills (about Rs. 30,132.60) for treatment, submitted though the originals were missing, should be considered; that he was unable to work for at least six months; and that several heads—transport, attendant expenses, bystander expenses, pain and suffering, and disability—were undervalued. He further contended that his income should be fixed at Rs. 4,500 per month, following the Supreme Court’s reasoning in Ramachandrappa v. Royal Sundaram Allianz Insurance Co. Ltd. The respondents supported the award as reasonable. The High Court allowed the duplicate bill, recalculated earnings at Rs. 4,500/month for six months, and enhanced several heads: loss of earnings, transport, bystander and attendant expenses, pain and suffering, disability, and future treatment. The revised total reached Rs. 1,25,300 with 9% interest and a three-month deposit obligation, and the appeal was allowed with no costs.

Submissions & Arguments

Contentions of Appellants / Petitioners

The appellant argued that the Tribunal erred in not accepting duplicate hospital bills totaling Rs. 30,132.60, despite the original bills being lost and duplicate copies produced. He asserted that the period of incapacity extended beyond four months and that several heads—such as transport to hospital, attendant expenses, bystander expenses, and cost of pain and suffering—were inadequately compensated. He urged enhancement of monthly income to Rs. 4,500 based on the 2008 wage structure for coolies and in light of Ramachandrappa v. Royal Sundaram Allianz Insurance Co. Ltd. He contended that future treatment costs, including removal of implants, would be incurred and should be awarded; he also sought a higher award for permanent/partial disability.

Contentions of Respondents

The Insurance Company contended that the Tribunal’s award was reasonable and supported by the evidence; no compelling grounds were shown to disturb the heads of compensation. It was argued that the existing award adequately addressed medical expenses, loss of earnings, and other heads, and that the appellant’s plea for higher monthly income and additional expenses did not warrant modification.

Cited Precedents (1)

Case Name	Citation	Treatment	Explanation
Ramachandrappa v. Royal Sundaram Allianz Insurance Co. Ltd.	2011(13) SCC 236	Positive	Cited and applied to fix the monthly earnings for a coolie (Rs. 4,500) and to compute loss of earnings, guiding the enhancement of compensation.

Diagnostic Tool

Beta

Does this judgment govern your specific facts?

Don't risk relying on a distinguishable precedent. Enter your facts or proposition below. We will test it against A. Venugopalan v. M.B. Madhu and United India Insurance Company Limited and instantly map out authorities that support, challenge, or govern your position.

Extracted Judgment Text

Exact text extracted from official judgment records.

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT: THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE T.R.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR & THE HONOURABLE SMT. JUSTICE P.V.ASHA WEDNESDAY, THE 21ST DAY OF JANUARY 2015/1ST MAGHA, 1936 MACA.No. 2515 of 2014 () ------------------------- AGAINST THE AWARD IN OPMV 610/2010 of M.A.C.T.,ERNAKULAM DATED 10-07-2014 APPELLANT/PETITIONER: --------------------- A. VENUGOPALAN, AGED 55 YEARS S/O KRISHNAN NAIR, MANGATTIL HOUSE, MAGALIYATH NADA, IRUMBANAM P.O., ERNAKULAM DISTRICT. BY ADVS.SRI.P.M.JOSHI SMT.SIJI K.PAUL RESPONDENT(S)/RESPONDENTS/RESPONDENTS: -------------------------------------- 1. M.B. MADHU S/O. MR.BOSE, AGE NOT KNOWN, MUNDEPADATH HOUSE, VADAKKEKKARA P.O. NORTH PARAVOOR, NEENDOOR-683522. 2. THE MANAGER UNITED INDIA INSURANCE COMPANY LIMITED, ALUVA-1. R2 BY ADV. SRI.P.V.JYOTHI PRASAD R BY SRI.JOHN JOSEPH VETTIKAD THIS MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS APPEAL HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 21-01-2015, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: ## **T.R.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR & P.V ASHA, JJ. ----------------------------------------------------M.A.C.A No.2515 of 2014 ---------------------------------------------------Dated this the 21[st] day of January, 2015** ## **JUDGMENT** ## Asha, J. The appellant is the injured in a motor vehicle accident occurred on 08.10.2008. He was hit by a motor cycle with registration No.KL 07/AY-5226 while he was walking through Irumpanam-Karingachira road. He fell down and sustained severe injuries. He was taken to VKM hospital, Tripunithura. He sustained compound fracture tibia and fibula of the left leg. He underwent treatment as an inpatient till 18.10.2008. The treatment certificate as well as the wound certificate give details of injuries and the treatments he underwent. According to him, interlocking nailing was done in the hospital. 2. The appellant was a coolie, aged 55 years. It was claimed that he was earning Rs.5,000/- monthly. The claim petition was filed seeking compensation to the tune of Rs.2,65,000/- which was limited to Rs.2 lakhs. 3. The Tribunal awarded a sum of Rs.62,320/- reckoning his income @ Rs.4,000/- per mensem. This appeal is filed **M.A.C.A No.2515 of 2014** 2 seeking enhancement of compensation on the ground that the income reckoned by the Tribunal is low and similarly the amount awarded towards compensation under various heads are inadequate. 4. We heard the learned counsel appearing on either side. The learned counsel appearing for the Insurance Company supported the award and contended that the compensation awarded is reasonable. 5. The learned counsel for the appellant pointed out that the Tribunal has awarded only a sum of Rs.700/- towards treatment expenses, even though he had produced all the details regarding the charges paid towards treatment underwent. It was stated that the original bills were lost and he produced duplicate bills. The Tribunal did not accept it. According to the appellant, a sum of Rs.30,132.60 was charged by the hospital. The duplicate bill shows the treatment period as 08.10.2008 to 18.10.2008. The injuries sustained by appellant or the treatment undergone by him are not disputed. We therefore find that the appellant is entitled to get the amount covered by the inpatient bill issued by the hospital and hence award a sum of Rs.30,132.60 towards medical expense. This is in addition to the **M.A.C.A No.2515 of 2014** 3 amount already awarded, ie. Rs.700/- by the Tribunal. The Tribunal has awarded a sum of Rs.16,000/- towards loss of earnings, observing that he was unable to undertake any work for a period of 4 months. The learned counsel for the appellant pointed out that the appellant was unable to undertake any work for a period of at least six months on account of the injuries sustained on his left leg. Regarding the income also, the appellant had claimed Rs.5,000/- per month as against the sum of Rs.4,000/- awarded by the Tribunal. We find that a sum of Rs.4,500/- per mensem can be reckoned as the monthly income of a Coolie having regard to the wage structure prevailed in the year 2008 and in the light of the judgment of the Apex Court in ## **Ramachandrappa v. Royal Sundaram Alliance Insurance** **Co. Ltd.** [2011(13) SCC 236], where the monthly earnings of a coolie involved in an accident in 2004 was fixed as Rs.4,500/-. Therefore, we award a sum of Rs.27,000/- towards loss of earnings for a period of 6 months (Rs.4,500X6). The Tribunal has awarded only a sum of Rs.1,000/- towards transport to hospital and back to home. It is seen that the appellant had to visit hospital several times subsequent to the accident on 08.10.2008 and he had to incur expenditure towards 4 **M.A.C.A No.2515 of 2014** transportation for his visits. We enhance the compensation under this head to Rs.2,000/-. The Tribunal has awarded a sum of Rs. 2000/-towards bystander expenses for 11 days of in-patient treatment. We enhance the same reckoning the rate at Rs. 250/per day to 2750/-. Towards compensation for pain and sufferings, the Tribunal has awarded only a sum of Rs.20,000/- as against the claim raised by the appellant for Rs.40,000/-. We find that the appellant underwent multiple surgeries on account of the compound fracture sustained by him on his left leg and he was unable to attend to his own personal needs for a long time. Having regard to the pain and mental agony that he would have experienced during this time at the age of 55, we enhance the compensation amount for pain and sufferings to Rs.30,000/-. Towards compensation for continuing permanent disability, the Tribunal awarded a sum of Rs.21,120/- on the basis of the disability assessed by the Medical Board as 4%. As we have reckoned the income of the appellant as Rs.4,500/- the compensation awarded under the above head is recalculated as Rs.4,500/- X 12 X 4/100 X 11, which will come to Rs.23,760/-. The Tribunal has not awarded any amount towards future treatments. It is pointed out that the interlocking nailing and the 5 **M.A.C.A No.2515 of 2014** inplants done during the treatment has not been removed so far. It is seen that further expenses would be incurred towards future treatment for removing the same and therefore we award a sum of Rs.7,500/- towards future treatment. 6. Accordingly we modify the award as follows. |**_Sl.No._**|**_Head of claim_**|**_Amt.awarded_**| |---|---|---| |1|Loss of earnings|Rs. 27,000.00| |2|Transport to hospital and back to home|Rs. 2,000.00| |3|Extra nourishment|Rs. 1,000.00| |4|Damage to clothes and articles|Rs. 500.00| |5|Attendant expenses|Rs. 2,750.00| |6|Treatment expenses(700+30,132.60)|Rs. 30,832.60| |7|Compensation forpain and sufferings|Rs. 30,000.00| |8|Compensation for continuing and permanent/partial disability (4500X12X4/100X11)|Rs. 23,760.00| ||**TOTAL**|**Rs. 1,17,842.60** **round off to** **Rs. 1,17,800.00**| (Rupees One lakh seventeen thousand eight hundred only) 7. Accordingly the appellant will be entitled to a total compensation of Rs.1,17,800/- (Rupees One lakh seventeen thousand eight hundred only). This will carry interest @ 9% per **M.A.C.A No.2515 of 2014** 6 annum from the date of petition. The Insurance Company is directed to deposit the entire amount of compensation within a period of three months from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment, less the amount already deposited before the Tribunal and on such deposit being made, the claimant can withdraw the amount. The appeal is accordingly allowed. No costs. _Sd/-_ _**T.R.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR Judge**_ _Sd/-_ _**P.V.ASHA Judge**_ rtr/ /true copy/ P.S to Judge The table occurring at page 5 of the judgment dated 21.01.2015 in M.A.C.A No.2515/2014 is modified as follows by incorporating a sum of 7,500/- as against the head `Future₹ treatment’; |atment’;||| |---|---|---| |**_Sl.No._**|**_Head of claim_**|**_Amt.awarded_**| |1|Loss of earnings|₹ 27,000.00| 7 **M.A.C.A No.2515 of 2014** |**_Sl.No._**|**_Head of claim_**|**_Amt.awarded_**| |---|---|---| |2|Transport to hospital and back to him|₹ 2,000.00| |3|Extra nourishment|₹ 1,000.00| |4|Damage to clothes and articles|₹ 500.00| |5|Attendant expenses|₹ 2,750.00| |6|Treatment expenses (₹700 + 30,132.60)|₹ 30,832.60| |7|Compensation for pain and sufferings|₹ 30,000.00| |8|Compensation for continuing and permanent/partial disability (₹ 4500x12x4/100x11)|₹ 23,760.00| |9|Future treatment|₹ 7,500.00| ||Total|₹ 1,25,342.60 round off to ₹ 1,25,300.00| and the total compensation “₹ 1,17,800/- (Rupees One lakh Seventeen thousand eight hundred only)” occurring in paragraph 7 is corrected as “₹ 1,25,300/- (Rupees One lakh twenty five thousand and three hundred only)”. Vide order dated 30/03/2015 in R.P.No.197/2015 in M.A.C.A No.2515/2014. Sd/Registrar (Judical)