Partly allowed

Sajimon v. Ajith Kumar K.R

Kerala HC22 Jan 2013MACA/1247/2012

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In this Motor Accident Claims Appeal, the Court found the compensation awarded by the Tribunal inadequate. It directed the third respondent to deposit an additional total sum of Rs. 19,200/- covering transportation, standers, pain and suffering, loss of earning power, and discomfort, along with interest.

What did the court decide?

Additional compensation of Rs. 19,200/- with interest at 7.5% per annum from 7/12/2007 to be deposited by the third respondent.

Sajimon Vs Ajith Kumar K.R — Motor Accident Claims | Kerala HC (2013)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT:

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE HARUN-UL-RASHID

¶4

TUESDAY, THE 22ND DAY OF JANUARY 2013/2ND MAGHA 1934

¶5

MACA.No. 1247 of 2012 ()

¶6

AGAINST THE AWARD IN OPMV.1629/2007 of M.A.C.T.,KOLLAM

DATED 27-03-2012

APPELLANT:

SAJI MON

S/O.SALIM,CHIRAYUDEVADAKKATHIL,MUZHANGODI MURI KALLELIBHAGAM,KARUNAGAPALLY,KOLLAM DIST

¶11

BY ADV. SRI.ANCHAL C.VIJAYAN

¶12

RESPONDENTS/RESPONDENTS:

¶13

AJITH KUMAR. K.R VALITHUNDIL BUILDING,KADAMPANADU P.O.ADOOR PATHANAMTHITTA DIST PIN-691552

¶14

SREEJITH. S KALATHIL VADAKKATHIL KALLELIBHAGOM P.O. KARUNAGAPALLY,KOLLAM DIST PIN-690546

¶15

NATIONAL INSURANCE COMPANY LIMITED KOLLAM BRANCH,PIN-691001

¶16

R3 BY ADV. SMT.SARAH SALVY

¶17

THIS MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS APPEAL HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 22-01-2013, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

¶18

HARUN-UL-RASHID,J.

¶19

M.A.C.A.NO. 1247 OF 2012

¶20

DATED THIS THE 22ND DAY OF JANUARY, 2013

¶21

JUDGMENT

¶22

The 2nd Claimant is the Appellant. The appeal is directed

¶23

against the award dated 27/3/2012 in O.P.(MV).No.1629/2007 on the file of the Ist Additional Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Kollam. The Tribunal passed the award allowing the claimants to realise an amount of `34,000/- with interest at 7.5% as compensation from respondents 1 and 2 jointly and severally. The 3^rd respondent Insurance Company is directed to deposit the award amount.

¶24

The lst claimant is the father of the 2^nd claimant. The 2^nd claimant is the injured. He was a minor at the time of accident. He met with an accident on 17/9/2007 while travelling in a motorcycle as pillion rider through the Sasthamcottah-Karunagappally road, the motorcycle ridden by the 2^nd respondent hit the 2^nd claimant as a result,

¶25

he sustained serious injuries. The 2^nd claimant was admitted in the Taluk Headquarters Hospital, Karunagappally and after first aid, he

¶26

-2-

¶27

M.A.C.A.No.1247/2012

¶28

was referred to the Medical College Hospital, Thiruvananthapuram. He was admitted as an inpatient in the Medical College Hospital on 17/9/2007, the date of accident and was discharged on 20/9/2007. He was again admitted in the Taluk Headquarters Hospital, Karunagappally on 20/9/2007 and continued treatment as an inpatient till 10/10/2007. It is submitted by the learned counsel for the claimants that the injured continued

¶29

the treatment in the Medical College Hospital, Thiruvananthapuram till 23/11/2007. Ext.A7 is the copy of the discharge card issued from the Medical College Hospital for nondepressed fracture left temporal bone. Ext.A11 is the treatment certificate issued from the Medical College Hospital.

¶30

The injured claimant is aged 15 years at the time of accident. He was a student. It is submitted that the injured claimant lost one academic year during the period of treatment. Considering the nature of the injuries sustained and the period of treatment, the Tribunal granted `34,000/- as compensation. This appeal is preferred complaining that the amount of compensation awarded is too low and inadequate.

¶31

-3-

¶32

M.A.C.A.No.1247/2012

¶33

On the date of accident he was taken to the Medical College Hospital, Thiruvananthapuram. It is submitted that he was discharged on 20/9/2007. During the months of October and November also he underwent treatment in the Medical College Hospital, Thiruvananthapuram. He has produced ExtA.12 bills showing the payment of vehicle charge for a total amount of 4,200/-. The Tribunal granted only 1,000/- as compensation under the head 'Transportation to hospital and back'. Considering the fact that he had travelled to Thiruvananthapuram in connection with the treatment for number of times and that he had undergone treatment for few months in the Medical College Hospital, this Court is of the view that the amount claimed as per Ext.A12 bill can be granted. Therefore, the claimant is entitled to additional compensation of `3,200/- under the head 'transportation to hospital and back'.

¶34

Considering the injuries caused and the period of treatment, this Court is of the view that by standers expense of `1,000/- granted by the Tribunal is not just and adequate.

¶35

-4-

¶36

M.A.C.A.No.1247/2012

¶37

Therefore, this Court re-fix 1,000/- as additional compensation under the said head. The amount of 10,000/- each granted by the Tribunal as the compensation for pain and suffering and loss of earning power is also not adequate and reasonable. In the facts and circumstances noticed above, this Court is of the view that the injured 2^nd claimant is entitled to 5,000/- each as additional compensation under the said two heads. Under the head 'discomfort' this Court is of the view that the compensation of 5,000/- granted is also inadequate. This Court re-fix 5,000/- as additional compensation under the head 'discomfort'. Thus, the injured 2<sup>nd</sup> claimant is entitled to additional total compensation of 19,200/-. The said amount shall carry interest at the rate of 7.5% per annum from 7/12/2007 till realisation. In all other respects, the award passed by the Tribunal shall stand. The 3^rd respondent is directed to deposit the said amount within 30 days from today.

¶38

Appeal is partly allowed.

¶39

HARUN-UL-RASHID, JUDGE.

¶40

kcv.

Sajimon v. Ajith Kumar K.R

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sajimon v. Ajith Kumar K.R

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Gopalakrishna Pillai Vs State of Kerala

Antony Vs the Manager, New India Assurance Company Ltd.

M.Gurumurthy Vs United India Insurance Co.Ltd.

R.Haripriya Vs the Branch Manager, the New India Assurance Company Ltd.

Vijayan V.G. Vs Mariya Susa

M. Dineshkumar Vs Manoj Mon.E.