Allowed

Selvaraj v. Parthan Achari

Kerala HC18 Jun 2010MACA/381/2004

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court allowed an appeal against the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal's award of Rs. 60,000. The bench fixed the appellant's monthly income at Rs. 2,000 instead of Rs. 1,500 and modified the compensation quantum, ordering the insurer to deposit an additional Rs. 31,800.

What did the court decide?

Compensation enhanced to include an additional Rs. 31,800 for disability and loss of earnings, total award Rs. 91,800.

Selvaraj Vs Parthan Achari — 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

¶4

FRIDAY, THE 18TH JUNE 2010 / 28TH JYAISTHA 1932

¶5

MACA.No. 381 of 2004()

¶6

---------------------OPMV.147/1997 of MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS TRIBUNAL, IRINJALAKUDA

¶7

APPELLANT(S): APPELLANT/PETITIONER IN OP(MV)

¶8

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

¶9

SELVARAJ, S/O. DEVADAS, KARIPARAMBIL HOUSE, NAYARANGADI, NEAR NJELLUR TEMPLE, KALLUR P.O., THRISSUR DISTRICT.

¶10

BY ADV. SRI.P.V.BABY SRI.A.N.SANTHOSH

¶11

RESPONDENT(S): RESPONDENTS IN OP(MV)

¶12

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

¶13

1. PARTHAN ACHARI, S/O. SUBRAMANIAN ACHARI, KALLAMKANDATHIL HOUSE, PUZHAVATTAM, P.O.CHANGANASSERY, KOTTAYAM DISTRICT.

¶14

2. RAJAN PILLAI S/O. KRISHNA PILLAI, THENNAT HOUSE (SAJI MANDIRAM), THENGARA, MADAPPALLI, CHENGANASSERY, KOTAYAM DISTRICT.

¶15

3. THE MANAGER, ORIENTAL INSURANCE CO.LTD., BRANCH OFFICE, MATTANCHERRY, ERNAKULAM.

¶16

ADV. SRI.P.V.JYOTHI PRASAD FOR R3

¶17

THIS MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS APPEAL HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 18/06/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:

¶18

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

¶19

¶20

M.A.C.A.No.381 OF 2004

¶21

- - - - Dated this the 18^th 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.147/1997 of Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Irinjalakkuda challenges the judgment and award of the Tribunal dated September 17, 2003 awarding a compensation of Rs. 60,000/-- for the loss caused to him on account of the injuries sustained by him in a motor accident.

¶25

The facts leading to this appeal in brief are these :

¶26

The claimant was aged 28 at the time of the accident and was working as a bus time announcer earning Rs.2,500/- per month, according to him. On September 6, 1996 at about 1.30 p.m, while the claimant was walking along the side of Mannuthi-Chalakudy public road, he was knocked down by the mini lorry bearing Reg.No.KL-5/3 7918 from behind. The claimant sustained serious injuries. According to the claimant, accident occurred due to the rash and negligent driving

¶27

MACA.No.381/2004 2

¶28

of the offending mini lorry by second respondent. First respondent as the owner, second respondent as the driver and third respondent as the insurer of the offending mini lorry are jointly and severally liable to pay compensation to the claimant. Claimant claimed a compensation of Rs. 2 lakhs.

¶29

Respondents 1 and 2, the owner and driver of the offending mini lorry remained absent before the Tribunal. The third respondent the insurer of the offending mini lorry filed a written statement admitting the policy.

¶30

Pws 1 and 2 were examined and Exts.A1 to A11 were

¶31

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 mini lorry by second respondent and awarded a compensation of Rs.60,000/- 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.

¶32

MACA.No.381/2004 3

¶33

Heard the counsel for the appellant/claimant and the

¶34

counsel for the Insurance Company.

¶35

The accident is not disputed. The finding of the Tribunal that the accident occurred due to the negligence on the part of the second respondent is not challenged in this appeal. Therefore, the only question which arises for consideration is whether the claimant is

¶36

entitled to any enhanced compensation.

¶37

The claimant sustained the following injuries as revealed

¶38

from Ext.A5, the wound certificate issued from the hospital and Ext.A6 discharge summary.

¶39

Fracture shaft of femur ( right)

¶40

Extensive abrasions on back of chest ( right)

¶41

Abrasions right arm, right leg, right foot, right knee and elbow.

¶42

Ext.A8, the certificate of disability, issued from the hospital

¶43

shows that he has now a disability of 10%.

¶44

The Tribunal awarded a total compensation of Rs.60,000/-.

¶45

The break up of the compensation awarded is as under :

¶46

Loss of earnings	- Rs. 9,000/-
Transportation expenses	- Rs. 1,000/-
Medical expenses	- Rs.11,000/-
Bystander's expenses	- Rs. 500/-
Disability	- Rs. 12,000/-

¶47

MACA.No.381/2004 4

¶48

Pain and suffering - Rs. 15,000/Loss of amenities - Rs. 11,500/-

¶49

Counsel for the claimant sought enhancement of

¶50

compensation for the disability caused and for loss of earnings.

¶51

The Tribunal took the monthly income of the claimant as Rs. 1500/- and adopted a multiplier of 17 and took the percentage of disability as 10% as stated in Ext.A8, which was issued by PW2, the doctor and awarded Rs. 12,000/- for the disability caused. According to the claimant, as a bus time announcer, he used to get Rs.2500/- per month. Ext.A9 is the certificate issued from the District Private Bus Operators Association to that effect. Taking into consideration the above aspect, we feel that his monthly income can be reasonably fixed at Rs.2,000/-. The multiplier adopted by the Tribunal as 17 and the percentage of disability as 16 are not seriously challenged in this appeal. Thus calculated for the disability caused, the claimant is entitled to a compensation of Rs. 40,800/- ( 2000 x 12 x 17 x 10%). Thus on this count, the claimant is entitled to an additional compensation of Rs.28,800/-.

¶52

There is another aspect in this case. The Tribunal awarded Rs.9,000/- for loss of earnings for six months @ Rs. 1500/- per month.

¶53

MACA.No.381/2004 5

¶54

As we have fixed the monthly income of the claimant as Rs. 2,000/-, the claimant is entitled to a compensation of Rs. 12,000/- towards loss of earnings. Thus on this count, the claimant is entitled to an additional compensation of Rs. 3,000/-. As regards the compensation awarded under other heads, we find the same to be reasonable and therefore are not disturbing the same.

¶55

In the result, the claimant is entitled to an additional compensation of Rs. 31,800/-. 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.

¶56

The Appeal is disposed of as found above.

¶57

A.K.BASHEER, JUDGE

¶58

P.Q.BARKATH ALI, JUDGE

¶59

sv.

¶60

MACA.No.381/2004 6

¶61

MACA.No.381/2004 7

Selvaraj v. Parthan Achari

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Selvaraj v. Parthan Achari

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

Arun Vs R.Sivasankaran

P.K.Abdul Kharim Vs K.Nafeesa

A.D.Manoharan Vs K.K.Ulahannan

Dr.Haridas R.T Vs Josey J.Jose

Kochappan Vs Sivan

Amina Vs Rameshkumar