Partly allowed

Abdul Fathah.T. v. Abdul Abbas

Kerala HC3 Jun 2010MACA/125/2004

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In an appeal under Section 173 of the Motor Vehicles Act, the High Court held that the Tribunal's quantum of compensation was insufficient. The court awarded an additional Rs. 30,000 for loss of amenities, enjoyment of life, and loss of future prospects, modifying the Tribunal's award.

What did the court decide?

Additional compensation of Rs. 30,000 awarded for loss of amenities, enjoyment of life, and loss of future prospects. Insurer to deposit amount within two months.

Abdul Fathah.T. Vs Abdul Abbas — Motor Accident Claims | Kerala HC (2010)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT :

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE A.K.BASHEER & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.Q.BARKATH ALI THURSDAY, THE 3RD JUNE 2010 / 13TH JYAISTHA 1932

¶4

MACA.No. 125 of 2004()

¶5

---------------------OPMV.134/1998 of MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS TRIBUNAL, MANJERI

¶6

APPELLANT(S): APPELLANT/PETITIONER

¶7

----------------------------------

¶8

ABDUL FATHAH T., AGED 20 YEARS SHAUMMER HOUSE, KURIYODAM, AYIKKARAPADI P.O., MALAPPURAM DISTRICT.

¶9

BY ADV. SRI.K.P.MUJEEB

¶10

RESPONDENT(S): RESPONDENTS

¶11

--------------------------

¶12

1. ABDUL ABBAS, PARAMBIL VARIYATH HOUSE, MANJAPATTA, MANJERI P.O. (DRIVER)

¶13

2. K.MUHAMMED, KARUTHEDATH ASARI THODUVIL HOUE, CHATANGOTTUPURAM P.O.VIA WARDOOR (OWNER)

¶14

3. UNITED INDIA INSURANCE CO.LTD., DIVISIONAL OFFICE ARAFA BUILDING, COURT ROAD, MANJERI.

¶15

ADV. SRI.MATHEWS JACOB, SENIOR ADVOCATE FOR R3

¶16

THIS MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS APPEAL HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 03/06/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:

¶17

A.K.BASHEER & P.Q.BARKATH ALI, JJ.

¶18

¶19

M.A.C.A.No.125 OF 2004

¶20

¶21

Dated this the 3^rd day of June, 2010

¶22

JUDGMENT

¶23

Barkath Ali, J.

¶24

In this appeal under Section 173 of Motor Vehicles Act, the claimant in O.P.(MV)No.134/1998 of Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Manjeri challenges the judgment and award of the Tribunal dated February 17, 2003 awarding a compensation of Rs. 80,000/- for the loss caused to him on account of the injuries sustained in a motor accident.

¶25

The facts leading to this appeal in brief are these :

¶26

On November 9, 1995 at about 9.a.m., while the claimant was

¶27

walking along the side of the road at Kuriyodam, a bus bearing Reg.No.KL-10/B-1134 driven by the first respondent came at a high speed from behind and knocked him down. The claimant sustained serious injuries. According to the claimant, accident occurred due to the rash and negligent driving of the offending bus by first respondent.

¶28

First respondent as the driver, second respondent as the owner and third

¶29

MACA.No.125/2004 2

¶30

respondent as the insurer of the offending bus are jointly and severally liable to pay compensation to the claimant. Claimant claimed a compensation of Rs. 1,75,000/-.

¶31

Respondents 1 and 2, the driver and owner of the offending

¶32

bus remained absent and were set ex parte by the Tribunal. The third respondent the insurer of the offending bus filed a written statement admitting the policy.

¶33

Exts.A1 to A9 were marked on the side of the claimant before the Tribunal. No evidence was adduced by the contesting third respondent. The Tribunal on an appreciation of evidence found that the accident occurred due to the rash and negligent driving of the offending bus by first respondent and awarded a compensation of Rs. 80,000/with interest @ 9% per annum from the date of petition till realisation and proportionate cost. The claimant has now come up in appeal challenging the quantum of compensation awarded by the Tribunal.

¶34

Heard the counsel for the appellant/claimant and the counsel for the Insurance Company.

¶35

The accident is not disputed. The finding of the Tribunal

¶36

¶37

MACA.No.125/2004

¶38

that the accident occurred due to the negligence on the part of the first respondent is not challenged in this appeal. Therefore, the only question which arises for consideration is whether the claimant is entitled to any enhanced compensation.

¶39

The claimant sustained the following injuries as revealed

¶40

from Ext.A2, copy of the wound certificate issued from Medical College Hospital, Calicut.

¶41

Depressed fracture of skull. 2. Lacerated injury on left fronto parietal region and intracraneal haematoma.

¶42

Ext.A4 is the reference card which shows that the claimant

¶43

was in the hospital for 13 days. He was subsequently admitted in the

¶44

National Hospital, Calicut on December 21, 2001. Ext.A5 is the Out Patient Ticket issued from there. Ext.A7 CT Scan report showed that the claimant has encephalmalecia left fronto parietal region and right tempero parietal region. Ext.A8 is the summary sheet of the Medical College Hospital, Thiruvananthapuram. The petitioner was referred to the Medical Board by the Tribunal and the Medical Board of District

¶45

MACA.No.125/2004 4

¶46

Hospital, Manjeri in Ext.X1 certificate assessed the permanent disability of the claimant as 20%. Claimant has healed scar on the left frontal region with absence of bone 8x5 cm. and post traumatic seizures and loss of memory.

¶47

The Tribunal awarded a total compensation of Rs.80,000/-.

¶48

The break up of the compensation awarded is as under :

¶49

Transport to hospital - Rs. 1,000/Extra nourishment - Rs. 2,000/Bystander's expenses - Rs. 2,000/Medical expenses - Rs.15,000/Pain and suffering - Rs.15,000/Disability - Rs.45,000/-

¶50

Counsel for the claimant sought enhancement of compensation awarded for the disability caused. Learned counsel pointed out that no compensation was awarded for the loss of amenities and enjoyment of life and for loss of future prospects.

¶51

Taking into consideration the nature of the injury sustained by the claimant, we feel that a compensation of Rs.15,000/- for loss of amenities and enjoyment of life and a compensation of

¶52

MACA.No.125/2004 5

¶53

Rs. 15,000/- for loss of future prospects in life would be reasonable. As regards the compensation awarded under other heads, we find the same to be reasonable and therefore are not disturbing the same.

¶54

In the result, the claimant is found entitled to an additional compensation of Rs. 30,000/-. He is entitled to interest @ 9% per annum from the date of petition till realisation and proportionate cost. The third respondent being the insurer of the offending vehicle shall deposit the amount before the Tribunal within two months from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment. The award of the Tribunal is modified to the above extent.

¶55

The Appeal is disposed of as found above.

¶56

A.K.BASHEER, JUDGE

¶57

P.Q.BARKATH ALI, JUDGE

¶58

sv.

¶59

MACA.No.125/2004 6

Abdul Fathah.T. v. Abdul Abbas

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Abdul Fathah.T. v. Abdul Abbas

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Thampi Vs Belbir Singh

Yashoda Vs M.Chandra Rao

Devassia Vs Chacko Abraham

State of Kerala Vs Brahmagiri B Estate

Mufeeda Vs P.P.Hamza

Selvaraj Vs Varghese