Kerala High Court
Sayyad Thaha vs Jishad. B on 20 November, 2021
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE P.G. AJITHKUMAR
SATURDAY, THE 20TH DAY OF NOVEMBER 2021/29TH KARTHIKA, 1943
MACA NO. 2240 OF 2015
AGAINST THE AWARD DATED 03.02.2015 IN O.P.(MV)NO. 476 OF
2011 ON THE FILE OF THE MOTOR ACCIDENTS CLAIMS TRIBUNAL,
KASARGOD
APPELLANT:
SAYYAD THAHA
AGED 29 YEARS
S/O.KUNHIKOYA THANGAL, SADATH MANZIL, ARLADKA,
NAKRAJE POST, KASARAGOD TALUK, KASARAGOD
DISTRICT.
BY ADVS.
SRI.V.T.MADHAVANUNNI
SRI.V.A.SATHEESH
RESPONDENTS:
1 JISHAD B.,
AGED 24 YEARS, S/O.MOHAMMED KUNHI,
JAMSHEEDA MANZIL, BEEJANTHADKA,
P.O.PERDALA, BADIYADKA VILLAGE,
KASARAGOD DISTRICT - 671 555.
2 M.ACHUTHAN
S/O.KUNHIRAMAN, MEETHAL MANGAD,
BARA POST, UDMA, KANHANGAD,
KASARAGOD DISTRICT - 671 319.
2
M.A.C.A.No.2240 of 2015
3 THE BRANCH MANAGER
SHRIRAM INSURANCE CO.LTD., IST FLOOR,
THALANGARA GATE, OPP.IBP PETROL PUMP,
NULLIPADY,KASARAGOD DISTRICT - 671 121.
BY ADVS.
R2 BY SRI.T.B.SHAJIMON
R3 BY SRI.MATHEWS JACOB (SR.)
SRI.P.JACOB MATHEW
SMT.PREETHY R. NAIR
THIS MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS APPEAL HAVING COME UP
FOR FINAL HEARING ON 20.11.2021, THE COURT ON THE SAME
DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
3
M.A.C.A.No.2240 of 2015
P.G. AJITHKUMAR, J.
-----------------------------------------------------------
M.A.C.A.No. 2240 of 2015
-----------------------------------------------------------
Dated this the 20th day of November, 2021
JUDGMENT
Appeal under Section 173 of the Motor Vehicles Act,
1988. The appellant was the petitioner in O.P.(MV) No.476 of
2011 on the file of the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal,
Kasaragod. The respondents in the appeal were the
respondents before the Tribunal.
2. The appellant had filed the claim petition under
Section 166 of the Act, claiming compensation on account of
the injuries that he sustained in an accident on 11.05.2011. It
was his case that, on the aforesaid date, he was travelling in a
bus driven by the 1st respondent from Cherkkala to Nekraje
and when it reached Edaneer, the bus went off the road as a
result of rashness and negligence on the part of its driver and
hit another bus, which came from the opposite direction. The
2nd respondent was the owner of the bus at the time of
accident. The appellant sustained avulsion of four teeth and
M.A.C.A.No.2240 of 2015
fracture of one tooth in the incident. The appellant underwent
treatment and he has to abstain from work for a period of six
months. He was treated as an inpatient for the period from
11.05.2021 and 12.05.2021 at E.K.Nayanar Memorial Co-
operative Hospital, Kasaragod.
3. The appellant was earning a monthly income of
Rs.6,000/-. The accident occurred due to the negligence of
the driver of the bus. The vehicle was insured with the 3 rd
respondent. Hence, the appellant claimed a compensation of
Rs.75,000/- from the respondents.
4. The 3rd respondent had filed a written statement in
the claim petition refuting the allegations. The 3 rd respondent
also disputed the age, income and occupation of the appellant
in the claim petition. However, the 3 rd respondent admitted
that the vehicle had a valid insurance coverage.
5. Exts.A1 to A6 were marked in evidence, but no
evidence was adduced by the respondents.
6. The Tribunal, after analysing the pleadings and
materials on record, by its award dated 03.02.2015, allowed
M.A.C.A.No.2240 of 2015
the claim petition in part, by permitting the appellant to
recover from the 3rd respondent an amount of Rs.36,000/-
with interest and costs.
7. Dissatisfied with the quantum of compensation
awarded by the Tribunal, the appellant is in appeal.
8. Heard the learned counsel appearing for the
appellant and the learned counsel appearing for the
respondents 2 and 3.
9. The sole question that arises for consideration in
this appeal is whether the quantum of compensation awarded
by the Tribunal is just and reasonable.
10. On a re-appreciation of the pleadings and material
on record, the Tribunal has awarded Rs.12,500/- as
compensation for pain and suffering. The injury sustained was
avulsion of four teeth and fracture of one tooth. Naturally, the
appellant should have undergone treatment for restoration of
teeth to normal, and that would involve suffering and pain,
besides that he underwent at the time of accident.
Considering those aspects, I deem it appropriate that the
M.A.C.A.No.2240 of 2015
compensation for pain and suffering is refixed as Rs.17,500/-.
11. The Tribunal has awarded Rs.4,000/- towards loss
of earning for one month. Following the ratio in
Ramachandrappa v. Manager, Royal Sundaram Alliance
Insurance Company Limited [(2011) 13 SCC 236], and
considering the fact that the accident occurred in the year
2011, I hold that the appellant's notional income can taken as
Rs.7,500/- per month. Therefore, Rs.4,000/- awarded by the
Tribunal under the head loss of earnings for one month, can
be enhanced to Rs.7,500/-.
12. In view of the re-fixation of the compensation for
'pain and sufferings' at Rs.17,500/-, the enhancement is
Rs.5,000/-
13. In view of the re-fixation of the notional monthly
income of the appellant at Rs.7,500/-, the compensation he is
entitled for 'loss of earnings' is Rs.7,500/-, i.e., an
enhancement of Rs.3,500/-.
14. With respect to other heads of compensation, I find
that the Tribunal has awarded reasonable and just
M.A.C.A.No.2240 of 2015
compensation.
In the result, the appeal is allowed in part, by enhancing
the compensation by an amount of Rs.8,500/- with interest at
the rate of 7.5% per annum on the enhanced amount, from
the date of petition till the date of deposit, and a costs of
Rs.1,500/-. The 3rd respondent is ordered to make payment
of the enhanced compensation with interest and costs through
the Tribunal within sixty days from the date of receipt of a
certified copy of the judgment. The Tribunal shall see that the
amount of enhanced compensation is duly disbursed to the
appellant in accordance with law.
SD/-
P.G. AJITHKUMAR, JUDGE
dkr
