Krishnankutty vs United India Insurance Co.Ltd
2022 Latest Caselaw 7047 Ker

               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