Kerala High Court

Vishnu C.R vs Shyamala P.K (Deleted) on 3 April, 2024

                IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
                                 PRESENT
                THE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE SOPHY THOMAS
     WEDNESDAY, THE 3RD DAY OF APRIL 2024 / 14TH CHAITHRA, 1946
                        MACA NO. 125 OF 2014
AGAINST THE ORDER/JUDGMENT DATED 03.08.2013 IN OPMV NO.511 OF 2009
OF MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS TRIBUNAL, MUVATTUPUZHA

APPELLANT/PETITIONER:

          VISHNU C.R
          S/O.RADHAKRISHNAN, RESIDING AT CHAKKUMKAL
          HOUSE,NERIAMANGALAM, KOTHAMANGALAM.
          BY ADVS.
          SMT.ANEY PAUL
          SRI.PHILIP J.VETTICKATTU

RESPONDENT/S:

    1      SHYAMALA P.K (DELETED)
           W/O.VELAPPAN, PARACKAPADI VEEDU, KARIMKULAM,
           ADIMALYPIN - 685 561.DELETED
     2     GEORGE JOSEPH (DELETED)
           KOLANJIYIL HOUSE, PANICHAYAM, NEDUNGAPARA
           P.O.,KURUPAMPADY. DELETED
     3     VELAPPAN P.S. (DELETED)
           S/O.SANKARAN PARACKAPADI VEEDU, KARIMKULAM,
           ADIMALYKARA, MANNAMKANDOM VILLAGE PIN - 685 561.
           DELETED
     4     THE BRANCH MANAGER
           THE NATIONAL INSURANCE COMPANY LTD, ERNAKULAM, PIN -
           682 035 (R1 TO R3 ARE DELETED FROM THE PARTY ARRAY VIDE
           ORDER DTD 25/6/2020 IN IA 1/20 IN MACA 125/2014.)
OTHER PRESENT:

          SRI.GEORGE A. CHERIAN - SC, NATIONAL INSURANCE COMPANY
          LIMITED


     THIS MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS APPEAL HAVING COME UP FOR
ADMISSION ON 03.04.2024, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE
FOLLOWING:
 MACA NO. 125 OF 2014                           2




                                  JUDGMENT

The appellant herein is the petitioner in

OP(MV) No.511 of 2009 on the file of Motor

Accidents Claims Tribunal, Muvattupuzha,

challenging the impugned award on the ground of

inadequacy of compensation.

2. On 16/4/2009 at about 10.30 am, while the

appellant was riding a motorcycle through

Kochi-Madurai national highway, he was knocked down

by KL-17/A-1530 Maruthi car driven by the 3rd

respondent in a rash and negligent manner. He

sustained serious injuries, and he was admitted and

treated in hospital for 121 days in total. He

suffered permanent disability also due to the

injuries suffered in the accident. He approached

the Tribunal claiming compensation of Rs.10 lakh,

but the Tribunal awarded only Rs.6,85,570/-, and

hence this appeal.

3. The 1st respondent was the registered owner

of the offending car. The 2nd respondent was its

insured owner, the 3rd respondent was its driver

and the 4th respondent was its insurer. Respondents

1 to 3 remained exparte. The 4th respondent

insurer contested the case, but admitted the

policy.

4. In the appeal, the respondent insurer

entered appearance through counsel and admitted the

policy.

5. Heard learned counsel for the appellant and

learned counsel for the respondent/insurer.

6. The appellant is assailing the award on the

ground of inadequacy of compensation. According to

him, he was a 20 year old business man doing

partnership business with his brother in law

earning monthly income of Rs.6,000/-. But learned

Tribunal fixed his notional income @ Rs.3,500/- per

month. The appellant relying on the decision

Ramachandrappa v. Manager, Royal Sundaram Alliance

Insurance Company Limited [AIR 2011 SC 2951], would

submit that even a coolie worker in the year 2009,

was eligible to get his notional income fixed @

Rs.7,000/- per month. So according to him, he is

eligible to get his monthly income fixed at

Rs.6,000/-. Relying on the decision

Ramachandrappa's case (supra), this court is

inclined to fix his notional income @ Rs.6,000/-.

7. Learned Tribunal assessed loss of earning for

12 months. Since this Court has fixed his notional

income @ Rs.6,000/-, he is eligible to get

Rs.72,000/-, under the head loss of earning for 12

months. After deducting Rs.42,000/- already

awarded, he is entitled to get the balance amount

of Rs.30,000/- as enhanced compensation, towards

loss of earning.

8. Towards pain and suffering, learned Tribunal

awarded Rs.25,000/- against his claim of

Rs.1 lakh. The appellant had suffered open fracture

of both bones of right forearm, open oblique

fracture distal shaft of tibia left. He was

hospitalized for 121 days in total. Considering

these aspects, this Court is inclined to enhance

the compensation under the head pain and suffering

by Rs.10,000/-.

9. Towards bystander expenses, learned Tribunal

awarded Rs.125/- per day for 121 days. Since the

accident was in the year 2009, this Court is

inclined to award bystander expenses @ Rs.200/- per

day for 121 days of hospitalization which will come

to Rs.24,200/-. After deducting Rs.15,125/- already

given, he is eligible to get the balance amount of

Rs.9,075/- as enhancement under the head, bystander

expenses.

10. Towards extra nourishment, the Tribunal

awarded only 6,000/-, though he was hospitalized

for 121 days. So this Court is inclined to award

Rs.3000 more, under the head extra nourishment.

11. For transportation expenses, the tribunal

awarded only Rs.5,000/-. The appellant was

hospitalized for 121 days in different spells, and

he was attending periodic reviews also, even after

discharge. Considering that aspect this Court is

inclined to award Rs.3,000/- more under the head

transportation expenses.

12. Under the head permanent disability, the

Tribunal awarded Rs.67,200/-, taking the permanent

disability as 10%. Ext.A15 disability certificate

was issued by an orthopedic surgeon, and not by any

medical board. The Doctor who issued the

certificate was not examined also to prove its

contents. So learned Tribunal is justified in

accepting the whole body disability of the

appellant as 10%. This Court has fixed his notional

income at Rs.6,000/-, when compensation for 10%

disability is assessed applying multiplier of 18,

and taking his notional income @ Rs.6,000/-, he is

eligible to get Rs.1,29,600/-. After deducting

Rs.67,200/- already awarded, he is entitled to get

the balance amount of Rs.62,400/-.

13. Towards loss of amenities, learned Tribunal

awarded Rs.18,000/- against his claim of

Rs.50,000/-. Ext.A15 certificate shows that, the

appellant had suffered 1.5cm shortening of left

leg, and flexion and extension of right elbow was

reduced by 4%. The appellant was a 20 year old boy.

So the shortening of left leg by 1.5 cm might have

affected his amenities in life, including his

marriage prospects also. So this Court is inclined

to award Rs.7,000/- more, under the head loss of

amenities.

14. The compensation awarded under all other

heads seems to be reasonable, and hence it needs no

modification.

15. The enhanced compensation awarded in this

appeal is stated in the table below:-

                               Amount                 Amount
                                                                   Difference to be
         Head of claim     awarded by the            awarded in
                                                                  drawn as enhanced
                               Tribunal                appeal         compensation


                                                      72,000/-
       Loss of earning         42,000/-                                 30,000/-
                                                     [6,000x12]

       Pain and
                               25,000/-               10,000/-          10,000/-
       suffering

       Loss of
                               18,000/-               +7,000/-          7,000/-
       amenities

       Bystander
                                15,125/-              24,200/-          90,75/-
       expenses

       Extra                                                            3,000/-
                                  6,000/-             +3,000/-
       nourishment

      Transportation                                                    3,000/-
                                 5,000/-             +3,000/-
      charges

      Permanent                                                        62,400/-
                               67,200/-              1,29,600/-
      disability

                                                     TOTAL             1,24,475/-


          16.      So    the    appellant            is    entitled     to    get

     enhanced          compensation         of       Rs.1,24,475/-      [30,000+

10,000+7,000+9,075+3,000+3,000+62,400].

17. The respondent/National Insurance Company is

directed to deposit the enhanced compensation in

the bank account of the appellant, with 8% interest

per annum, from the date of petition till the date

of deposit within a period of two months from the

date of receipt of a copy of this judgment. The

deposit must be in terms of the directives issued

by this Court in Circular No.3 of 2019 dated

06/09/2019 and clarified in O.M.No.D1/62475/2016

dated 07/11/2019 after deducting the liabilities,

if any, of appellant towards Tax, balance court fee