Allowed

Ammini Varghese v. P.Y.Babu

Kerala HC4 Nov 2013MACA/3097/2009

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court enhanced compensation awarded to a senior citizen injured in a motor accident. The court adjusted loss of earnings based on the appellant's age and extended hospitalization, increased pain and suffering and loss of amenities, and awarded substantial bystander expenses, directing the insurance company to deposit the additional amount with interest.

What did the court decide?

Enhanced compensation awarding an additional Rs. 51,600 with 9% interest, directed to be deposited by the insurance company within two months.

Ammini Varghese Vs P.Y.Babu — Medical Negligence | Kerala HC (2013)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT:

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE S.SIRI JAGAN &

¶4

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.RAMAKRISHNAN

¶5

MONDAY, THE 4TH DAY OF NOVEMBER 2013/13TH KARTHIKA, 1935

¶6

MACA.No. 3097 of 2009 ( )

¶7

AGAINST THE AWARD IN OPMV 1692/2004 of MOTOR ACCIDENTS CLAIMS TRIBUNAL, PERUMBAVOOR DATED 15-01-2009

¶8

APPELLANT/PETITIONER:

¶9

AMMINI VARGHESE,W/O VARGHESE,AGED 67 YEARS PALACKAPILLY (H), IRINGOLE P.O KURUPPAMPADY.

¶10

BY ADVS.SRI.K.S.HARIHARAPUTHRAN

¶11

SRI.M.D.SASIKUMARAN

¶12

SRI.GEORGE MATHEW

¶13

RESPONDENT(S):

¶14

1. P.Y BABU,S/O YACOB PALACKAPILLY(H) IRINGOLE P.O, KURUPPAMPADY

¶15

2. UNITED INDIA INSURANCE CO., PERUMBAVOOR

¶16

R2 BY ADV. SRI.P.SANKARANKUTTY NAIR

¶17

THIS MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS APPEAL HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 04-11-2013, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

¶18

¶19

S.Siri Jagan & K. Ramakrishnan, JJ

¶20

==============================

¶21

M.A.C.A.No.3097 of 2009

¶22

=============================== Dated this, the 04^th day of November, 2013.

¶23

J U D G M E N T

¶24

Siri Jagan, J.

¶25

The appellant is a lady who suffered head injury in an accident caused by the negligent driving of a vehicle owned and driven by the 1^st respondent and insured with the 2^nd respondent. She filed OP(MV) No. 1692/2004 before the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Perumbavoor, claiming compensation for the injuries suffered by her in the accident. The tribunal after finding negligence on the part of the driver of the vehicle, awarded compensation under various heads as follows;

¶26

Loss of earnings	Rs.5,400/-
Treatment expenses	Rs.10,800/-
Transportation expenses	Rs.500/-
Pain and suffering	Rs.10,000/-
Loss of amenities	Rs.6,000/-
Extra nourishment	Rs.500/-
Attendant's charges	Rs.500/-
Total	Rs.33,700/-

¶27

Dissatisfied with the quantum of compensation awarded by the

¶28

tribunal, the appellant has filed this appeal seeking enhanced compensation.

¶29

The appellant contends that she was 62 years old at

¶30

the time of accident, on 25.03.2004. She was hospitalized for more than 142 days, despite which, the tribunal awarded only 3 months' loss of earnings, which is on the lower side. Counsel for the appellant further submits that the appellant was an agriculturist and a housewife. Therefore, the income of Rs.1,800/- fixed by the tribunal is on the lower side. It is also submitted that despite serious head injury and hospitalization for a period of almost 5 months, the tribunal has awarded only Rs.10,000/- towards pain and sufferings and Rs.6,000/towards loss of amenities which are palpably low. Despite the long period of hospitalization, only Rs.500/- has been awarded for expenses of employing a bystander. The appellant therefore seeks enhancement of compensation under all heads.

¶31

We have heard counsel for the Insurance Company who argues to sustain the impugned award.

¶32

Notice has already been issued to the respondents in the application to condone delay. Despite service of notice, the first respondent did not choose to enter appearance also. Since the Insurance is not disputed, we are of opinion that no separate notice need be issued to the 1^st respondent in the

¶33

appeal. Therefore, we have heard the appeal finally.

¶34

At the outset, we note that the appellant had claimed only Rs.2,000/- as her monthly income. The tribunal accepted only Rs.1,800/-. In 2004, an agriculturist and housewife could be expected to have earned Rs.2,000/-. So we are inclined to fix the monthly income of the appellant as Rs.2,000/-.

¶35

Considering the injuries sustained by the appellant and the period of hospitalization, she must have been out of action for at least 8 months for which she is entitled to loss of earnings at the rate of Rs.2,000/-for 8 months, instead of Rs.5,400/- awarded by the Tribunal, which would come to Rs.16,000/-. In view of the fact that the appellant suffered head injury and she was hospitalized for 142 days, we enhance the compensation for pain and sufferings to Rs. 20,000/- from Rs.10,000/-. For the same reason, we enhance the compensation for loss of amenities to Rs.15,000/- from Rs. 6,000/-. Since the appellant was hospitalized for 142 days, we are inclined to award the appellant bystanders' expenses for 150 days at the rate of Rs.150/- per day, amounting to Rs.22,500/-.

¶36

Adding together and deducting the amounts already

¶37

awarded under various heads the appellant would be entitled to additional compensation of Rs.51,600/- over and above what has been awarded by the Tribunal. This amount would carry interest at the rate of 9% per annum from the date of petition till date of payment. The 2^nd respondent Insurance Company is directed to deposit that amount also within 2 months.

¶38

With the above modification of the impugned award, the appeal is disposed of.

¶39

Sd/-

¶40

S. Siri Jagan, Jugde.

¶41

Sd/- K.Ramakrishnan, Judge.

¶42

¶43

[True copy]

¶44

P.A to Judge

Ammini Varghese v. P.Y.Babu

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Ammini Varghese v. P.Y.Babu

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

State of Kerala Vs Vijayalatha

State of Kerala Vs C.Kushan

Vijayan Vs Kunjan

Nagappan Vs Cijo

Joseph Mathew @ Jose Vs Tomy George @ Tom and 2 Others

Vasnathakumari Vs K.M.Salim