Kerala High Court
Madhavi vs Subramanian on 9 April, 2021
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.V.KUNHIKRISHNAN
FRIDAY, THE 09TH DAY OF APRIL 2021 / 19TH CHAITHRA, 1943
MACA.No.1095 OF 2014
AGAINST THE AWARD IN OPMV 490/2004 DATED 18-01-2008 OF DISTRICT
COURT & SESSIONS & MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS TRIBUNAL ,KALPETTA
APPELLANT/S:
MADHAVI
AGED 74 YEARS
W/O. LATE VELANDI,
JAMSHYLE NIVAS, P.O. VYTHIRI,
CHUNDALE VILLAGE.
BY ADV. SMT.CELINE JOSEPH
RESPONDENT/S:
1 SUBRAMANIAN
AGED 48 YEARS
S/O. NARAYANAN,
KORANGOTTU THEKKURISSI,
PALGHAT.
2 MANAGING DIRECTOR
K.S.R.T.C.,
THIRUVANANTHAPURAM.
R2 BY SRI.P.C.CHACKO, SC, KERALA STATE ROAD TRANSPORT
CORPN.
THIS MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS APPEAL HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON
09.04.2021, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
MACA.No.1095 OF 2014
2
P.V.KUNHIKRISHNAN, J
---------------------------------------
M.A.C.A. No. 1095 of 2014
------------------------------------------
Dated this the 9th day of April 2021
JUDGMENT
The appellant is the petitioner in O.P(M.V). No.
490/2009 on the file of the Motor Accidents Claims
Tribunal, Kalpetta. The above claim petition was filed
under Section 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act claiming
compensation for the personal injuries sustained to the
appellant in a road traffic accident. (Hereinafter the
parties are mentioned in accordance to their rank
before the Tribunal)
2. The short facts are like this: - On 23.09.2003 at
about 3.00 p.m., when the petitioner was travelling in a
KSRTC Bus to Vythiri and when the Bus reached at
Chellod Estate, another KSRTC bus bearing
Registration No. KL-15-2651 came from the opposite
MACA.No.1095 OF 2014
direction hit the bus and as a result, she sustained
serious injuries. She was taken to various hospitals on
different dates. According to the petitioner, the
accident occurred due to the rash and negligent driving
of the bus by the 1st respondent. Second respondent is
the owner of the offending vehicle. Therefore, they are
jointly and severally liable to pay compensation.
3. To substantiate the case, Exhibits A1 to A8 were
marked on the side of the petitioner and the petitioner
herself was examined as PW1. After going through the
evidence and documents, the Tribunal found that the
appellant is entitled an amount of Rs.44,550/- (Rupees
Forty Four Thousand Five Hundred and Fifty Only) as
compensation with interest at the rate of 6% p.a., from
the date of petition till realisation. Aggrieved by the
quantum of compensation, this appeal is filed.
4. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner
and the learned counsel for the 2nd respondent.
MACA.No.1095 OF 2014
5. The learned counsel for the petitioner
submitted that the monthly income fixed by the
Tribunal is only Rs.1,500/-. According to the learned
counsel, the petitioner was a house wife/Coolie aged 65
years and was getting a monthly income of Rs.5,000/-.
The learned counsel relied on the judgment of the Apex
Court in Ramachandrappa v. The Manager, Royal
Sundaram [2011(13) SCC 236] and contended that
the Apex Court observed that even a coolie will get an
amount of Rs.4,500/- per month in the year 2004.
6. I think there is some force in the arguments of
the learned counsel. The accident in this case was
happened on 23.09.2003. Taking the principle laid
down by the Apex Court in Ramachandrappa's case
(supra), I find that an amount of Rs.4,000/- can be fixed
as monthly income of the appellant. As far as the
multiplier is concerned, the Tribunal taken the
multiplier as '5'. Considering the age of the petitioner,
MACA.No.1095 OF 2014
the correct multiplier is '7'. If that is the case, the
compensation for disability is to be recalculated like
this:-
4000x12x7x40/100=Rs. 1,34,400/-
The Tribunal awarded an amount of Rs. 36,000/-
and that is to be deducted. Therefore, the appellant is
entitled an additional amount of Rs.98,400/- (Rupees
Ninety Eight Thousand and Four Hundred Only)
towards loss of disability.
7. As far as loss of earning is concerned, the
Tribunal assessed the same for a period of one month
taking the monthly income as Rs.1,500/-. Considering
the serious injuries sustained by the petitioner
including amputation of right hand, the appellant is
entitled loss of earnings for a period of six months by
fixing the monthly income as Rs.4,000/-. Then the
amount will be Rs. 24,000/- (4000x6). Tribunal already
granted an amount of Rs.1,500/- and that is to be
MACA.No.1095 OF 2014
deducted. Therefore, the appellant is entitled an
additional amount of Rs.22,500/- (Rupees Twenty Two
Thousand and Five Hundred Only) towards loss of
earnings.
8. The learned counsel submitted that the Tribunal
awarded only an amount of Rs.500/- towards transport
to hospital. I think an additional amount of Rs.500/-
(Rupees Five Hundred Only) can be allowed for
transport to hospital.
9. Similarly, for extra nourishment, Tribunal
awarded an amount of Rs.500/-. Considering the facts
and circumstances, a further amount of Rs.1,000/-
(Rupees One Thousand Only) is allowed on that head.
10. The learned counsel submitted that towards
bystander's expenses, only an amount of Rs.300/- is
awarded by the Tribunal. Admittedly, the petitioner
was in hospital for 30 days. The Tribunal ought have
fixed atleast an amount of Rs.150/- per day for 30 days
MACA.No.1095 OF 2014
in this head. If that is the case the amount will be
Rs.4500/- (30x150). The Tribunal already awarded an
amount of Rs.300/- and that is to be deducted.
Therefore, the petitioner is entitled another amount of
Rs.4,200/- (Rupees Four Thousand and Two Hundred
Only) for bystander's expenses.
11. Towards pain and sufferings, the Tribunal
awarded an amount of Rs. 5,000/-. Considering the
serious nature of injuries sustained and the period of
hospitalisation, I think that an additional amount of Rs.
15,000/- (Rupees Fifteen Thousand Only) can be
granted for pain and sufferings.
12. Similarly, for loss of amenities, no amount is
awarded by the Tribunal. After hearing both sides, I
find that, for loss of amenities an amount of Rs.15,000/-
(Rupees Fifteen Thousand Only) can be granted.
13. The enhanced compensation entitled by the
petitioner can be summarised like this:-
MACA.No.1095 OF 2014
Head Amount
Compensation for disability Rs.98,400/-
Loss of earnings Rs.22,500/-
Transport to Hospital Rs. 500/-
Loss of amenities Rs.15,000/-
Pain and sufferings Rs.15,000/-
Bystanders' expenses Rs.4,200/-
Extra nourishment Rs.1,000/-
Total Rs.1,56,600/-/
Therefore, this appeal is allowed in part. The
impugned award is modified and the appellant is
entitled an enhanced compensation of Rs.1,56,600/-
(Rupees One Lakh Fifty Six Thousand and Six Hundred
Only) with interest at the rate of 6% p.a, from the date
of application till realisation. The 2nd respondent is
directed to pay the enhanced compensation with
interest.
Sd/-
P.V.KUNHIKRISHNAN
JUDGE
avs
