## **IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM**
**PRESENT:**
**THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE C.T.RAVIKUMAR & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL K.NARENDRAN**
**FRIDAY, THE 4TH DAY OF AUGUST 2017/13TH SRAVANA, 1939**
## **MACA.No. 2436 of 2013 ()**
**------------------------IN OPMV 635/2009 of MACT, THODUPUZHA DATED 22.07.2013 ----------------------------------------------------------**
**APPELLANT(S)/PETITIONER : -------------------------------------------**
**RAJU K. S/O. KRISHNAPILLA, RESIDING AT PADINJAREDATH HOUSE, ARAKULAM, THODUPUZHA.**
## **BY ADVS.SMT.ANEY PAUL SRI.PHILIP J.VETTICKATTU**
**RESPONDENT(S)/RESPONDENTS :**
**---------------------------------------------------**
## **1. JOSE ABRAHAM**
**S/O. ABRAHAM, RESIDING AT KOOTTUNKAL HOUSE, VELLIYAMATTOM P.O., THODUPUZHA. 685 584**
## **2. KURIAN M.A**
**S/O. AUGUSTY, MANNARTHOTTATHIL HOUSE, EDADU, ELAPPALLY P.O.**
## **3. THE MANAGER**
**NATIONAL INSURANCE COMPANY LIMITED, FIRST FLOOR, PULIMOOTTIL SHOPPING ARCADE, THODUPUZHA. 685 584**
**R BY ADV. SRI. S.K. AJAYAKUMAR R BY SMT.K.S.SANTHI**
**THIS MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS APPEAL HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 04-08-2017, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:**
## **VS**
## **C.T.RAVIKUMAR & ANIL.K.NARENDRAN, JJ. ============================= M.A.C.A. No.2436 of 2013**
**============================** Dated this the 4[th] day of August, 2017
## **JUDGMENT**
## ANIL.K.NARENDRAN, J.
This appeal arises out of the award passed by the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Thodupuzha dated 22.07.2013 in O.P.(MV)No.635/2009, a claim petition filed by the appellant/claimant under Section 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 claiming compensation on account of the injuries sustained by him in a motor accident which occurred on 16.07.2009, while he was riding his motor cycle bearing Reg.No.KL-7 N-6034. At the place of accident, the said motor cycle was hit by a bus bearing Reg.No.KL-06 B-6899, owned and driven by respondents 1 and 2 and insured with the third respondent. As a result of the accident, the appellant/claimant sustained serious injuries. Alleging that the accident occurred due to the rash and negligent driving of the bus by the second
_M.A.C.A. No.2436 of 2013_
_-2-_
respondent driver, a claim petition was filed before the Tribunal, claiming a total compensation of Rs.6,00,000/under different heads.
2. Before the Tribunal Exts.A1 to A13 were marked on the side of the appellant/claimant. The respondents have not chosen to adduce any oral or documentary evidence.
3. After considering the materials on record, the Tribunal arrived at a finding that the accident occurred due to the rash and negligent driving of the bus by the second respondent driver. Since the said vehicle was covered with a valid insurance policy, the third respondent insurer was held liable to indemnify the first respondent owner. Under different heads, the Tribunal awarded a total compensation of Rs.2,96,730/- and directed the third respondent insurer to deposit the said amount before the Tribunal together with interest at the
_M.A.C.A. No.2436 of 2013_
_-3-_
rate of 8.5% per annum from the date of petition, i.e., from 10.12.2009 till realisation with proportionate cost.
4. Dissatisfied with the quantum of compensation
awarded by the Tribunal under different heads, the appellant/claimant is before this Court, in this appeal.
5. We have heard the learned counsel for the appellant/claimant and also the learned counsel for the third respondent insurer.
6. The sole issue that arises for consideration in this appeal is as to whether the appellant/claimant is entitled for enhancement of the compensation awarded by the Tribunal under different heads.
7. The accident is of the year 2009. At the time of accident, the appellant/claimant was aged 57 years. He claimed a monthly income of Rs.6,000/- as a fish merchant. However, no reliable materials were placed before the Tribunal in order to prove his monthly income.
_M.A.C.A. No.2436 of 2013_
_-4-_
He has also not chosen to mount the box. It was in the said circumstances that the Tribunal took the monthly income notionally as Rs.4,500/-, for the purpose of assessing compensation under different heads.
8. In _**Ramachandrappa v. Manager Royal Sundaram Alliance Insurance Company Ltd [2011 (13)SCC 236]**_ , the Apex Court fixed the monthly income of a Coolie, who met with a motor accident in the year 2004 at Rs.4,500/-. In the instant case, the accident is of the year 2009 and at the time of accident, the appellant/claimant was an able bodied person aged 57 years. Considering the economic conditions prevailing at the time of accident, we find no reason to disbelieve the version of the appellant/claimant that at the time of accident he was earning a monthly income of Rs.6,000/-. In the result, we deem it appropriate to refix the monthly income of the appellant/claimant at Rs.6,000/-, as claimed
_M.A.C.A. No.2436 of 2013_
_-5-_
in the claim petition, for the purpose of assessing compensation under different heads.
9. The injuries sustained by the appellant/claimant as borne out from Ext.A7 Accident Register-cum-Wound certificate reads thus :-
_“Abrasion right side chest; Laceration bone exposed right thigh lower half; Rupture left hemidiaphragm; Left haemothorax; Splenic injury & Fracture right femur.”_
Ext.A8 discharge summary would show that he undergone inpatient treatment for a period of 22 days. Ext.A10 is the disability certificate issued by the Medical Board of Taluk Head Quarters Hospital, Thodupuzha in which the percentage of permanent disability has been certified as 22%. However, the Tribunal took the functional disability at 18%, without assigning any reasons. We have perused Ext.A10 disability certificate issued by the Medical Board, which would show that the percentage of disability has
_M.A.C.A. No.2436 of 2013_
_-6-_
been assessed as 22%. However, the basis of such assessment is not discernible from the said certificate. In such circumstances, we find no reason to interfere with the finding of the Tribunal in scaling down the percentage of disability as 18%, for the purpose of assessing compensation under different heads.
10. The compensation awarded by the Tribunal under different heads reads thus :-
|**_Sl.N_**<br>**_o_**|**_Head of claim_**|**_Amount claimed_**<br>**_(in Rs)_**|**_Amount awarded_**<br>**_(in Rs)_**|
|---|---|---|---|
|1|Bystanders expenses|10000|4400|
|2|Loss of earning|18000|22500|
|3|Transportation<br>expenses|10000|2000|
|4|Extra nourishment|20000|3000|
|5|Damage to clothing<br>and articles|500|500|
|6|Medical expenses|2,00,000|1,33,570|
|7|Pain and suffering|50000|28000|
|8|Disability|2,00,000|77760|
|9|Loss of amenities|50000|25000|
_-7-_
_M.A.C.A. No.2436 of 2013_
|**_Sl.N_**<br>**_o_**|**_Head of claim_**|**_Amount claimed_**<br>**_(in Rs)_**|**_Amount awarded_**<br>**_(in Rs)_**|
|---|---|---|---|
||**Total**|**Limited**<br>**to**<br>**Rs.6,00,000/-**|**Rs.2,96,730.00**|
11. Ext.A8 discharge summary would show that the appellant/claimant had undergone inpatient treatment for a period of 22 days. Since the accident is of the year 2009, he is entitled for compensation under the head bystanders expenses at the rate of Rs.250/- per day and that under the head extra nourishment at the rate of Rs.150/- per day. The Tribunal awarded a sum of Rs.4,400/- and Rs.3,000/- respectively under the above heads. On reassessing at the rate of Rs.250/- per day and Rs.150/- per day respectively, the compensation under the head bystanders expenses comes to Rs.5,500/- (250x22), resulting an additional compensation of **Rs.1,100/-.** The compensation under the head extra nourishment is reworked as Rs.3,300/-(150x22), resulting an additional
_M.A.C.A. No.2436 of 2013_
_-8-_
compensation of **Rs.300/-.**
13. Towards loss of earning, the Tribunal awarded a sum of Rs.22,500/- at the rate of Rs.4,500/- for a period of 5 months. Considering the nature of injuries sustained and the treatment the appellant/claimant had undergone, as borne out from medical records, the Tribunal was justified in awarding loss of earning for a period of 5 months. Since we have already refixed his monthly income notionally at Rs.6,000/-, the compensation under this head is reworked as Rs.30,000/-(6,000x5), resulting an additional compensation of **Rs.7,500/-.**
14. Towards pain and suffering, the Tribunal awarded a sum of Rs.28,000/-. Considering the nature of injuries sustained and the treatment the appellant/claimant had undergone, the compensation awarded by the Tribunal under this head represents a just and reasonable compensation, which warrants no
_M.A.C.A. No.2436 of 2013_
_-9-_
enhancement in this appeal.
15. Towards compensation for disability, the Tribunal awarded a sum of Rs.77,760/-, taking the monthly income as Rs.4,000/-, applying the multiplier of 9, applicable to the age group of the appellant/claimant and taking the percentage of disability as 18%. Since we have already refixed the monthly income of the appellant/claimant at Rs.6,000/-, the compensation under this head is reworked as Rs.1,16,640/-(6,000x12x9x18/100), resulting an additional compensation of **Rs.38,880/-.**
16. Towards loss of amenities, the Tribunal awarded a sum of Rs.25,000/-. Considering the nature of injuries sustained and the disability that has arisen therefrom, as certified in Ext.A10 disability certificate, the compensation awarded by the Tribunal under this head also represents just and reasonable compensation, which warrants no enhancement in this appeal.
_M.A.C.A. No.2436 of 2013_
_-10-_
In the result, the appellant/claimant will be entitled for a total compensation of **Rs.47,780/-** (Rupees forty seven thousand seven hundred and eighty only), (Rs.1,000/-+Rs.300+Rs.7,500/-+Rs.38,880/-) which will carry interest at the rate of 8% per annum from the date of petition till realisation.
Since the insurance coverage of the offending vehicle is not in dispute, the third respondent insurer shall deposit the said amount before the Tribunal within two months from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment.
The appeal is disposed of as above. There will be no order as to costs.
Sd/-
**C.T.RAVIKUMAR, JUDGE**
Sd/- **ANIL.K.NARENDRAN, JUDGE**
VS
/TRUE COPY/
PA TO JUDGE
