IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT:
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE P.R.RAMACHANDRA MENON & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL K.NARENDRAN TUESDAY, THE 5TH DAY OF JANUARY 2016/15TH POUSHA, 1937
MACA.No. 2472 of 2010 ( )
--------------------------
AGAINST THE AWARD IN OPMV 210/2008 of MACT VADAKARA DATED 19-02-2010
APPELLANT/PETITIONER IN OPMV::
--------------------------------------------------
C.DILSHAD, S/O.C.A.KAREEM, CHEVIDAMMAL HOUSE, P.O.AYANCHERY, KOZHIKODE DISTRICT.
BY ADVS.SRI.AVM.SALAHUDIN SMT.P.Y.SHEHEERA
RESPONDENTS/RESPONDENTS IN OPMV
----------------------------------------------------------
1. MOOSA HAJI, MANATHUKANDY HOUSE, NADAKKU THAZHA, P.O.VATAKARA 673 101.
2. P.P.NARAYANAN, S/O.KUNHIRAMAN, PUTHIYA PARAMBATH HOUSE, NADAKKUTHAZHA P.O., VATAKARA 673 112.
3. THE ORIENTAL INSURANCE CO.LTD., SREENITHI BUILDING, P.B.NO.27, NARAYANA NAGAR VATAKARA, KOZHIKODE 673 101.
R3 BY ADV. DR.ELIZABETH VARKEY
THIS MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS APPEAL HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 05-01-2016, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
## APPENDIX IN MACA.2472/10
## **APPELLANT'S ANNEXURE:**
ANNEXURE A: TRUE COPY OF CERTIFICATE ISSUED BY THE FACULTY IN MULTI MEDIA IN MUTI HANA COLLEGE OF ADVANCED TECHNOLOGY.
## **RESPONDENTS' ANNEXUES: NIL**
TRUE COPY
P.S.TO JUDGE
dsn
## **P.R.RAMACHANDRA MENON & ANIL K.NARENDRAN, JJ. -------------------------------------------------M.A.C.A.No.2472 OF 2010**
**-------------------------------------------------DATED THIS THE 5[th] DAY OF JANUARY, 2016**
## **JUDGMENT**
## **ANIL K.NARENDRAN , J** .
The appellant is the claimant in OP(MV)No.210/2008 on the file of the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Vatakara, an application filed under Section 166 of the Motor Vehicles act, claiming compensation for the injuries sustained in a motor accident occurred on 3.2.2007. While the appellant was riding a motor cycle, a bus bearing registration No.KL-18/3216 owned, driven and insured by respondents 1 to 3 came in a rash and negligent manner and hit the motor cycle resulting injuries to the appellant. Claiming a total compensation of 3,00,000/-under different heads, the₹ appellant filed claim petition before the Tribunal.
2. Before the Tribunal, Exts.A1 to A4 were marked on the side of the appellant and Ext.B1, a copy of the charge sheet, was marked on the side of the respondents. Both sides have not chosen to adduce any oral evidence.
3. After considering the materials on record, the Tribunal
M.A.C.A.No.2472/10
-2-
found that the accident occurred due to the rash and negligent driving of the lorry by the 2[nd] respondent. The 3[rd] respondent, being the insurer of the lorry was directed to pay the amount of compensation to the appellant. The Tribunal awarded a total compensation of 1,21,470/- under different heads and directed₹ the 3[rd] respondent insurer to deposit the said amount before the Tribunal together with interest at the rate of 7.5% per annum from the date of petition till realisation along with a cost of ₹1,500/-.
4. The sole issue that arises for consideration in this appeal is as to whether the compensation awarded by the Tribunal under different heads represents just and reasonable compensation.
5. The pleadings and materials on record would show that, at the time of accident the appellant was aged 19 years. No document was produced before the Tribunal to substantiate the claim made by the appellant regarding his monthly income of ₹4,000/-. In the absence of any reliable materials, the Tribunal proceeded as if the appellant is a non-earning member. Along with the appeal, the appellant has produced Annexure-A
M.A.C.A.No.2472/10
-3-
certificate dated 'nil' issued by one M/s Multi Hands Advanced Technology, New Bus Stand, Vatakara. In Annexure A certificate issued by the Managing Director, it is certified that the appellant is working as a Faculty in Multimedia since February, 2006, drawing a monthly salary of 4,500/-. The appellant has not₹ produced any documents to show that he possess the requisite qualification for a Faculty in Multimedia. Therefore, Annexure-A certificate produced along with the appeal cannot be relied upon. However, we notice that the accident occurred in the year 2007 and at the time of accident, the appellant was an able bodied person aged 19 years. Considering the aforesaid fact, we deem it appropriate to fix the monthly income of the appellant notionally at 4,000/-.₹
6. Towards loss of earning, the Tribunal has not granted any amount, treating the appellant as a non-earning member. Further, the appellant has not chosen to produce any document to substantiate the fact that due to the injuries sustained in the accident, he suffered any disability.
7. During the pendency of the appeal, by order dated 26.5.2015, the appellant was referred to the Medical Board in
M.A.C.A.No.2472/10
-4-
order to assess his disability. Pursuant to the said order, the appellant appeared before the Medical Board and the certificate of permanent disability issued by the Medical Board dated 23.7.2015 is forwarded to the Registrar of this Court along with a covering letter dated 28.7.2015 of the Superintendent of the Government Medical College, Calicut. The Medical Board has certified that the appellant is having a permanent disability of 50% and occupational disability of 50%. However, the particulars of the assessment made by the Medical Board are not borne out from the certificate placed on record. It is not known as to whether the 50% permanent disability assessed by the Medical Board is the whole body disability. In that view of the matter, we deem it appropriate to reckon 25% as the whole body disability for the purpose of assessing compensation towards loss of earning. In that view of the matter, taking 4,000/- as the₹ notional monthly income and applying the multiplier of '18' applicable to the age group, the compensation payable to the appellant under the head loss of earning will come to ₹ **2,16,000** /- (i.e., 4000x12x18x25/100).
8. Towards medical expenses, the Tribunal awarded a sum
M.A.C.A.No.2472/10
-5-
of 38,655.37/-. It is based on Ext.A4 series of medical bills, the₹ Tribunal awarded compensation under the above head. In the absence of any further materials, we find absolutely no ground to enhance the compensation awarded under this head.
9. In the accident, the appellant sustained serious head injury and multiple fracture of skull bone. The appellant had also undergone inpatient treatment for nearly 4 months. Towards pain and suffering, the Tribunal awarded a sum of ₹32,000/-. Considering the nature of injuries sustained and the treatment he had undergone, we find that the compensation awarded by the Tribunal under the above head represents just and reasonable compensation, which warrants no enhancement in this appeal.
10. Towards bystander expenses, the Tribunal awarded a sum of 23,800/-. From Exts.A2 and A3, it can be seen that₹ altogether the appellant had under gone inpatient treatment for a period of 119 days, out of which, for 45 days he was in ICU. Considering the inpatient treatment undergone by the appellant we find that the compensation awarded by the Tribunal under the above head represents just and reasonable compensation.
11. Towards loss of amenities, the Tribunal awarded only a
M.A.C.A.No.2472/10
-6-
meagre sum of 15,000/-. As we have already noticed, the₹ materials on record would show that the appellant had sustained serious injuries in the accident. The certificate of permanent disability issued by the Medical Board dated 23.7.2015 would also
show that he had sustained severe injuries resulting disability to a larger extent. Considering the nature of injuries and the disability resulted therefrom, we deem it appropriate to grant the appellant a consolidated amount of 50,000/- towards loss of₹ amenities and loss of marriage prospects. Accordingly, after deducting a sum of 15,000/-, already awarded by the Tribunal₹ towards loss of amenities, the appellant will be entitled for a sum of ₹ **35,000/-** under this head.
12. Towards extra nourishment, the Tribunal awarded a sum of 10,000/-, which requires no enhancement in this appeal.₹
13. In the result, the appellant will be entitled for an additional compensation of **₹2,51,000/-** in this appeal.
14. The Tribunal awarded interest at the rate of 7.5% per annum from the date of petition till realisation. In **Kaushnuma Begum v. New India Assurance Co. Ltd. (2001 (2) SCC 9),** taking note of the fact that the Nationalised Banks are granting
M.A.C.A.No.2472/10
-7-
interest at the rate of 9% per annum on fixed deposits for one year, the Apex Court directed that, the compensation amount refixed shall bear interest at the rate of 9% per annum from the date of the claim. Considering the principle laid down in the aforesaid decision, we deem it appropriate to refix the rate of interest for the additional compensation awarded in this appeal at 9% per annum from the date of petition till date of deposit.
15. Since the insurance coverage of the offending vehicle was admitted by the 3[rd] respondent insurer, we direct the said respondent to deposit the additional compensation awarded in this appeal together with interest before the Tribunal, within a period of one month from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this judgment.
Appeal is disposed of as above.
## Sd/- **P.R.RAMACHANDRA MENON** , **JUDGE**
Sd/- **ANIL K.NARENDRAN, JUDGE**
dsn
True copy
P.S.to Judge
