Kerala High Court
Haris vs The Divisional Manager on 27 November, 2021
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE DR. JUSTICE KAUSER EDAPPAGATH
SATURDAY, THE 27TH DAY OF NOVEMBER 2021 / 6TH AGRAHAYANA,
1943
MACA NO. 1199 OF 2016
AGAINST THE AWARD IN OPMV 995/2012 OF I ADDITIONAL MOTOR
ACCIDENT CLAIMS TRIBUNAL ,KOLLAM
APPELLANT/PETITIONER:
HARIS
AGED 38 YEARS
S/O.SAINULABDEEN, PV HOUSE, AMBIPOIKA,
PERUMPUZHA, ELAMPALLOOR
BY ADVS.
SRI.PRATHEESH.P
SMT.RENY ANTO
RESPONDENT/3RD RESPONDENT:
THE DIVISIONAL MANAGER
THE NATIONAL INSURANCE COMPANY LTD.,
KOLLAM, 691001
BY ADV SMT.SARAH SALVY
THIS MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS APPEAL HAVING BEEN FINALLY
HEARD ON 27.11.2021, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE
FOLLOWING:
MACA No.1199/2016
-:2:-
J U D G M E N T
Dated this the 27th day of November, 2021
The claimant at the Tribunal is the appellant. He challenges
the quantum of compensation awarded to him vide the impugned
award.
2. The claimant met with an accident on 7/2/2011 at 1.30
p.m. He was riding his motor cycle bearing Regn.No.KL-29/3858.
The accident occurred when a motor cycle owned by the 1 st
respondent and driven by the 2nd respondent at the Tribunal in a
rash and negligent manner hit against the motor cycle driven by
the claimant. The 3rd respondent at the Tribunal, who is the sole
respondent at this court, is the insurer. Their liability is admitted.
The claimant sustained serious injuries including fracture. His
permanent disability was assessed by the doctor at 25%. He was
hospitalised for a total period of 36 days. He claimed total
compensation of `10,75,000/- The Tribunal awarded
compensation of `9,73,479/-. Dissatisfied with the same, the
MACA No.1199/2016
claimant preferred this appeal.
3. I have heard the learned counsel for the appellant and
Smt.Sarah Salvy, the learned standing counsel for the insurance
company.
4. The injury sustained by the claimant has been stated
in Exts.A8 and A9 wound certificates and Exts.A10 to A13
discharge cards. It has been reproduced in paragraphs 8 to 13 of
the impugned award. Since there is no dispute regarding the
injuries, I am not reproducing the same here. The doctor has
assessed the permanent disability at 25%. It is also not in
dispute. The Tribunal awarded a total compensation of
`9,73,479/- under each head as follows:
Head of claim Amount claimed Amount
awarded
Loss of earning `50,000/- `30,000/-
Transportation to hospital `5,000/- `5,000/-
Bystander's expense `5,000/- `3,600/-
Medical expense `5,50,00/- `6,54,529/-
Extra nourishment `5,000/- `5,000/-
MACA No.1199/2016
Damage to clothing `1,000/- `350/-
Pain and suffering `25,000/- `15,000/-
Compensation for disability and loss `4,09,000/- `2,55,000/-
of earning power
Loss of amenities `25,000/- `5,000/-
Total `10,75,000/- `9,73,479/-
5. The learned counsel for the claimant submitted that
the amount awarded by the Tribunal under each head is very low.
I will deal with the amount awarded by the Tribunal under each
head. Under the head "Loss of Earnings", Tribunal awarded
`30,000/- taking into account the income @`5,000/- per month.
The claimant was an instructor at ITI, Kollam. Ext.A15 certificate
produced would show that he was drawing a monthly salary of
`10,000/-. The learned counsel for the appellant submitted that
the Tribunal ought to have taken into account the said amount as
his income. Applying the dictum laid down by the Apex Court in
Ramachandrappa v. Manager, Royal Sundaram Alliance
Insurance Company Ltd. [(2011) 3 SCC 236], I am of the view
that the monthly income of the claimant can be taken as `8,000/-
MACA No.1199/2016
per month. The Tribunal granted loss of income only for six
months. Considering the injuries sustained, I am of the view that
the claimant is entitled to loss of income for a period of eight
months @`8,000/- per month. Thus, the claimant is entitled to a
total sum of `64,000/- under this head. Under the head "By
stander's expenses", the claimant claimed `5,000/-, but the
Tribunal awarded only `3,600/-. I am of the view that the claimant
is entitled for the entire `5,000/- claimed. The amount awarded
under the head "Medical Expense" does not warrant any
interference as the entire amount covered by the medical bills
produced was granted by the Tribunal. Damage to clothing
awarded by the Tribunal is only `350/-. I am of the view that it can
be enhanced to `750/-. So also, the pain and suffering awarded
by the Tribunal also can be enhanced to `25,000/- from `15,000/-
awarded. Under the head "Compensation for Disability and Loss
of Earning Power", the Tribunal awarded `2,55,000/-. The said
amount was arrived at taking into account `5,000/- as the
monthly income. I have already found that the income has to be
fixed @`8,000/- per month. The multiplier reckoned by the
MACA No.1199/2016
Tribunal is 17, which is not correct. The multiplier applicable is
only 16. On such calculation, under the said head, the claimant is
entitled to a total sum of `3,84,000/-. Under the head of "Loss of
Amenities", the amount awarded by the Tribunal was only
`5,000/-. I am of the view that it can be enhanced to `10,000/-.
Hence, the amount awarded by the Tribunal under each head has
to be reassessed as follows:-
Head of claim Amount Amount Amount Difference
claimed awarded by reassessed
the Tribunal
Loss of earning `50,000/- `30,000/- `64,000/- `34,000
Transportation to `5,000/- `5,000/- Nil --
hospital
Bystander's expense `5,000/- `3,600/- `5,000/- `1,400/-
Medical expense `5,50,00/- `6,54,529/- Nil --
Extra nourishment `5,000/- `5,000/- Nil --
Damage to clothing `1,000/- `350/- `750/- `400/-
Pain and suffering `25,000/- `15,000/- `25,000/- `10,000/-
MACA No.1199/2016
Compensation for `4,09,000/- `2,55,000/- `3,84,000/- `1,29,000/-
disability and loss of
earning power
Loss of amenities `25,000/- `5,000/- `10,000/- `5,000/-
Total `10,75,000/- `9,73,479/- `4,88,750/- `1,79,800/-
Thus, the appellant is entitled to an additional
compensation of `1,79,800/- (One lakh seventy nine thousand
and eight hundred only). The 2nd respondent is directed to
deposit the said amount along with interest and proportionate
costs as ordered by the Tribunal within a period of three months
from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment. The appeal is
allowed as above.
Sd/-
DR. KAUSER EDAPPAGATH
JUDGE
Rp
