D. Leelavathi Amma v. United India Insurance Co. Ltd.

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE R.BASANT THE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE M.C.HARI RANI THURSDAY, THE 21ST JANUARY 2010 / 1ST MAGHA 1931 MACA.No. 224 of 2008() ---------------------OPMV.102/2000 of MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS TRIBUNAL, KALPETTA,WAYANAD .................... APPELLANT(S): APPELLANT/PETITIONER D.LEELAVATHI AMMA, W/O. LATE PARAMESWARAN NAIR, PRASANTH NIVAS, AMBUKUTHY, MUTTIL P.O., WAYANAD. BY ADV. SMT.CELINE JOSEPH RESPONDENT(S): RESPONDENT NO.3 UNITED INDIA INSURANCE CO. LTD., P.B.NO.41, MAIN ROAD, KALPETTA. ADV. SRI.K.SANDESH RAJA THIS MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS APPEAL HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 21/01/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE **R.BASANT & M.C.HARI RANI, JJ. * * * * * * * * * * * * *** M.A.C.A No.224 of 2008 ---------------------------------------Dated this the 21[st] day of January 2010 ## **J U D G M E N T** ## **Basant,J** Injured/claimant is the appellant. She suffered injuries including fracture of the right clavicle in a motor accident which took place on 22/12/1999. She was a house wife. She was an inpatient for six days in a private hospital. She has allegedly suffered permanent physical disability to the tune of 8%. 2. She claimed an amount of Rs.1.5 lakhs as compensation. The tribunal, by the impugned award, directed payment of a total amount of Rs.14,450/- as per the details given below: |||Rs.| |---|---|---| |Loss of earnings (Rs.1,500/- x 1/3)||500/-| |Medical expenses||500/-| |Transport to hospital, extra<br>||1,050/-| |nourishment and damage to||| |clothing (Rs.300/- + Rs.500/- + Rs.250/-)||| |Bystander's expenses||200/-| |Pain and suffering||5,000/-| |Reduction in earning|capacity<br>|7,200/-| |(Rs.1,500/- x 12 x 5 x|8/100)|| ||**Total**<br>|**14,450/-**| M.A.C.A No.224/08 2 3. The said amount was directed to be paid along with interest @ 6% p.a from the date of the petition to the date of the payment. 4. The appellant claims to be aggrieved by the impugned award. What is the grievance? The learned counsel for the appellant assails the impugned award on various grounds. 5. First of all it is contended that interest awarded @ 6% p.a is painfully and perversely low. Relying on the decision in ## **Dharampal v. U.P State Road Transport Corporation [2008** **(2)KLT 691 (SC )]** it is contended that interest must have been awarded atleast @ 7.5% p.a. We accept that contention of the learned counsel for the appellant. 5. The learned counsel for the appellant argues that the monetary equivalent of the service rendered by the house wife at home reckoned at Rs.1,500/- p.m is too low; but we are unable to agree. We are satisfied that the monetary equivalent of the service rendered - @ Rs.1,500/- p.m in 1999 is absolutely reasonable and the same does not warrant any interference by invoking the appellate jurisdiction. 6. We agree with the learned counsel for the appellant that compensation awarded for loss of earnings at Rs.500/- is too 3 M.A.C.A No.224/08 inadequate. It must have been held that the appellant must have been rendered involuntarily incapable of rendering any services atleast for a period of 45 days considering the nature of the injury suffered. 7. Rs.500/- alone has been awarded as the medical expenses. She was an in-patient for six days. She had suffered a fracture also. Even in the absence of better evidence, we are of the opinion that the tribunal must have reasonably compensated the appellant for the probable medical expenses that must have been incurred. It is unnecessary for tribunals, called upon to determine the just and reasonable compensation, in every case to ritualistically insist on production of documents. We are satisfied that an amount of Rs.1,500/- must certainly have been awarded as the minimum amount of medical expenses even accepting that the appellant had not produced any document. The learned counsel for the appellant then contends that Rs.200/- awarded as bystander's expenses for six days during which the appellant was an in-patient is inadequate. We agree with the learned counsel for the appellant. Rs.600/- can safely be awarded as the minimum indisputable expenses incurred for the bystander. M.A.C.A No.224/08 4 8. Fracture was suffered. Right clavicle was fractured. The learned counsel for the appellant argues and we agree that an amount of Rs.5,000/- awarded for pain and suffering even in 1999 was inadequate. We direct payment of an amount of Rs.8,000/- under this head. 9. For the reduction in earning capacity, following the dictum in **Sarla Verma v. D.T.C [(2009)6 SCC 121]** , we agree that 7 must have been reckoned as the multiplier. Consequently, the appellant is entitled for enhancement of the compensation under the head of loss of earning capacity. The disability suffered by a person has two pronged reflections of his life. It would affect the earning capacity. It would also impair the quality of life which the disabled can aspire to live thereafter in life. The tribunal has not awarded an amount under the head of loss of amenities. The sixty year old housewife/appellant is definitely entitled to compensation for impairment in the quality of life. She will have to endure the same for the rest of her life. The tribunal erred in not awarding any amount as compensation under that head. M.A.C.A No.224/08 5 10. The above discussions lead us to the conclusion that the appellant is entitled to the following further amount as compensation in addition to the amounts awarded by the tribunal. |1.|Loss of earnings|| |---|---|---| ||(Rs.1,500/- x 1.5)|= Rs.1,750/-| ||i.e Rs.2,250/- minus Rs.500/-|| |2.|Medical expenses|= Rs.1,000/-| ||(Rs.1,500/- minus Rs.500/-)|| |3.|Bystander's expenses|= Rs.400/-| ||(Rs.100/- x 6)|| ||i.e. Rs.600/- minus Rs.200/-|| |4.|Pain and suffering|= Rs.3,000/-| ||(Rs.8,000/- minus Rs.5,000/-)|| |5.|Reduction in earning capacity|= Rs.2,880/-| ||(Rs.1,500/- x 12 x 7 x 8/100)|| ||= Rs.10,080/- minus Rs.7,200/-|| |6.|Loss of amenities|= Rs.5,000/-| ||**Total**|**= Rs.14,030/-**| |11.|In the result,|| |a)|This M.A.C.A is allowed in part.|| |b)|In addition to the amounts awarded by the tribunal,|| |the appellant is found entitled to a further amount of Rs.14,030/-||| |(Rupees|fourteen thousand and thirty only) as per the details|| |shown above.||| 6 M.A.C.A No.224/08 c) It is further directed that interest shall be payable @ 7.5% p.a on the entire compensation amount from the date of the petition to the date of payment. d) All other directions of the tribunal are upheld. Appropriate fresh directions shall be issued by the tribunal regarding release/deposit of the compensation. **(R.BASANT, JUDGE)** **(M.C.HARI RANI, JUDGE)** jsr M.A.C.A No.224/08 7 M.A.C.A No.224/08 8 **R.BASANT & M.C.HARI RANI, JJ.** .No. of 200 ORDER/JUDGMENT 29/07/2009