The High Court allowed the appeal partially, enhancing the compensation awarded by the Claims Tribunal. The Court corrected the monthly income assessment and disability multiplier to grant an additional ₹27,180 as compensation along with interest.
Appellant entitled to additional compensation of ₹27,180 with interest at 7.5% per annum from the date of petition.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT:
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE K.T.SANKARAN
&
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE M.L.JOSEPH FRANCIS
WEDNESDAY, THE 12TH DAY OF DECEMBER 2012/21ST AGRAHAYANA 1934
MACA.No. 2202 of 2012 ()
OPMV.1435/2005 of MACT MUVATTUPUZHA
APPELLANT-PETITIONER:
BABY
S/O.MATHAI, ELACHIKUNNEL HOUSE PALAKUZHA KARA & VILLAGE.
BY ADVS.SRI.MATHEW JOHN (K)
SRI.DOMSON J.VATTAKUZHY
RESPONDENT(S)/RESPONDENTS:
MUTTAPPILLIL HOUSE, OLIYAPPURAM POST, 686 679.
THIS MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS APPEAL HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 05-12-2012, THE COURT ON 12.12.2012 DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
K.T.SANKARAN & M.L.JOSEPH FRANCIS JJ.,
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - M.A.C.A. No.2202 of 2012 E
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Dated this the 12th day of December, 2012
JUDGMENT
Joseph Francis J.,
This appeal is filed by the petitioner in O.P.(M.V.) No.1435 of 2005 on the file of M.A.C.T., Muvattupuzha.
riding a motor cycle bearing Reg.No. KL-5L-4450 along the Angamaly-Kottayam M.C. Road, the offending jeep bearing Reg. No.KL-7J-4554 driven by the first respondent from the opposite direction hit against it, as a result of which the petitioner sustained serious injuries. The accident was occurred solely due to the rash and negligent driving of the offending jeep by the first respondent, the 2nd respondent is the registered owner-cum-insured of the offending jeep and the 3rd respondent is the insurer. The petitioner
M.A.C.A. No.2202 of 2012 :2:
claimed 2,53,000/- as compensation. Respondents 1 and 2 remained ex-parte. Third respondent filed written statement admitting the policy of the jeep and contended that the accident was not due to the negligence of the first respondent and that the compensation claimed is excessive. Before the Claims Tribunal no oral evidence was adduced from both sides. Exts.A1 to 9 and C1 were marked. The Claims Tribunal on considering the evidence on record found that the accident was due to the rash and negligent driving of the first respondent and awarded a compensation of 1,16,000/- to the petitioner together with interest at the rate of 8% per annum from the date of petition till the date of realisation from the respondents and third respondent was directed to deposit the amount as the insurer. Being dissatisfied with the quantum of compensation awarded the petitioner filed this appeal.
M.A.C.A. No.2202 of 2012
:3:
Insurance Company supported the award.
heads as follows:
| Amount Amount |
|
|---|---|
| Head |
Claimed (<br>)<br> Awarded (<br>) |
| Loss of earning | 18,000/- 7,500/- |
| General expenses: transportation extra nourishment, damage to clothes etc. |
} } 10,000/- 3,000/- } |
| Medical expenses | 75,000/- 45,583/- |
| Pain and suffering | 50,000/- 12,000/- |
| Loss of amenities | 50,000/- 10,000/- |
| Compensation for loss of earning due to permanent disability (2500x12x14x9/100) |
} } 50,000/- 37,800/- }----------------------------------- 2,53,000/- 1,15,883/- = = = = == = = = = = = = = = = (Rounded of to `1,16,000/-) |
admitted in that hospital on 30.9.05 at 9.15 P.M. with crush injury right foot and near total crush amputation of right tiny toe with
M.A.C.A. No.2202 of 2012 :4:
bone loss from 1st metatarcal with loss of digital vascularity and lacerated wound right forehead sustained in a road traffic accident involving the motor cycle and jeep at 8.15 P.M. on the same day. He was discharged on 14.10.05. Ext.A8 is the discharge summary issued from that hospital which would corroborate Ext.A7 wound certificate. Ext.C1 is disability certificate issued by the Medical Board constituted by the District Medical Officer Ernakulam which would evidence that the appellant had 12% permanent disability.
9% on the ground that no data was available to assess the extent to which the disability noted in Ext.C1 had affected the earning capacity of the appellant. According to the appellant at the time of accident he was working as a salesman in a toddy shop at Koothattukulam and was earning 6,000/- per month. But the Claims Tribunal took 2,500/- only as monthly income of the appellant which according to us is on the lower side and we fix the monthly income of the appellant as 4,000/-. Calculating on that basis the appellant is entitled to get 12,000/- as compensation for loss of earning for three months in the place of `7,500/- awarded by
M.A.C.A. No.2202 of 2012 :5:
the Tribunal. For calculating the compensation for permanent disability the Claims Tribunal took 14 as the suitable multiplier. Calculating on that basis the appellant is entitled to get 60,480/(4000x12x14x9/100) as compensation for permanent disability in the place of 37,800/- awarded by the Tribunal. Thus in total the appellant is entitled to get `27,180/- as additional compensation.
Accordingly this appeal is allowed in part and the appellant/petitioner is entitled to get `27,180/- as additional compensation together with interest at the rate of 7.5% per annum from the date of petition till the date of realisation from the respondents and the third respondent is directed to deposit the amount within three months from this date. There is no order as to
costs.
Sd/
K.T. SANKARAN, (JUDGE)
Sd/ M. L. JOSEPH FRANCIS, (JUDGE)
dl/
3 issues framed by the court
Whether the compensation awarded by the Claims Tribunal was inadequate and required enhancement.
The appropriate monthly income and disability multiplier to calculate permanent disability compensation.
Whether the petitioner is entitled to additional compensation for loss of earning and permanent disability.
BABY
SANTHOSH KUMAR
M.J.JACOB
THE NEW INDIA ASSURANCE COMPANY LTD.
K.T. SANKARAN
M.L.JOSEPH FRANCIS
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
