IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE MURALI PURUSHOTHAMAN
FRIDAY, THE 17TH DAY OF JUNE 2022 / 27TH JYAISHTA, 1944
MACA NO. 2982 OF 2016
AGAINST THE AWARD DATED 20.12.2013 IN OPMV 648/2009 OF MOTOR
ACCIDENT CLAIMS TRIBUNAL , PALAKKAD
APPELLANT/PETITIONER:
KRISHNANKUTTY, AGED 42 YEARS
S/O. APPUKUTTAN, PLANKADE, THENKURUSSI P.O.,
ALATHUR TALUK, PALAKKAD DISTRICT.
BY ADV SRI.JACOB SEBASTIAN
RESPONDENT/RESPONDENT NO.3:
UNITED INDIA INSURANCE CO.LTD.
DIVISIONAL OFFICE, PALAKKAD-678 001.
BY ADV P.K.MANOJKUMAR
THIS MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS APPEAL HAVING BEEN FINALLY ON
17.06.2022, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
MACA NO. 2982 OF 2016 ..2..
JUDGMENT
This appeal is preferred by the petitioner in O.P. (MV)No.648/2009 on the files of the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Palakkad. The parties are referred to as per their status in the claim petition.
2. According to the petitioner, on 20.02.2009, while he was standing on the side of the Manathukavu road alongside his bicycle, a motor cycle ridden by the 2nd respondent in a rash and negligent manner, hit the petitioner and he sustained injuries. He was hospitalised for 2 days. The 3 rd respondent is the insurer of the motor cycle. The petitioner claimed an amount of Rs.1,50,000/- as compensation for the injuries sustained in the accident.
3. Before the Tribunal, respondents 1 and 2 remained ex parte. The 3rd respondent insurer admitted the existence of valid insurance policy in respect of the motor cycle. However, they contended that the 1st respondent is not the registered MACA NO. 2982 OF 2016 ..3..
owner of the vehicle. Therefore, the petitioner impleaded the registered owner as 4th respondent. The Tribunal found that the accident happened due to the negligence of the 2nd respondent and directed the 3rd respondent to pay an amount of Rs.76,155/- to the petitioner along with 9% interest per annum from the date of the petition till realisation and proportionate costs.
4. Aggrieved by the quantum of compensation awarded by the Tribunal, the petitioner has preferred this appeal.
5. The petitioner claimed an amount of Rs.3,200/- as monthly income and the Tribunal took the same for the purpose of assessment of compensation. Ext.A10 is the disability certificate issued by PW1 doctor assessing the percentage of permanent disability of the petitioner as 9%. However, the Tribunal found that the impact of disability is only around 5% and hence, the disability was taken as 5%. I find that the Tribunal is not justified in scaling down the percentage of disability from 9% to 5%, mechanically. Since PW1 Doctor, who treated the petitioner had assessed the disability as 9%, I MACA NO. 2982 OF 2016 ..4..
re-fix the percentage of disability of the petitioner as 9%. The multiplier applicable is '15'.
6. The Tribunal has awarded an amount of Rs.28,800/- as compensation for loss of earning power. The petitioner was aged 39 years at the time of the accident. Taking the percentage of disability as 9%, the compensation for loss of earning power is re-calculated as Rs.51,840/- [3,200x12x15x9/100]. After deducting an amount of Rs.28,800/-, the petitioner is entitled for an enhanced amount of Rs.23,040/- [51,840-28,800] under the said head.
7. Rs.20,000/- has been awarded by the Tribunal as compensation under the head loss of amenities and convenience of life. Taking note of the gravity of injuries sustained by the petitioner, I find that an amount of Rs.30,000/- will be just and reasonable compensation under this head and the said amount is granted. Since the petitioner has already been awarded an amount of Rs.20,000/-, he is entitled for an additional amount of Rs.10,000/- [30,000-20,000] under the said head.
MACA NO. 2982 OF 2016 ..5..
In the result, the petitioner is entitled for an enhanced amount of Rs.33,040/- (Rupees thirty three thousand and forty only) [23,040+10,000]. The 3rd respondent insurance company is directed to deposit the amount with 9% interest per annum from the date of petition till realisation along with proportionate costs, within a period of two months from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment. While calculating the interest on the enhanced compensation, the petitioner will not be entitled for interest for a period of 716 days in the light of the order dated 11.02.2022 in C.M.Application No.1/2016 in the appeal.
The appeal is disposed of accordingly.
Sd/-
MURALI PURUSHOTHAMAN JUDGE SB/18/06/2022