Partly allowed

C.K.Baiju v. the Secretary, Feroke Grama Panchayat

Kerala HC21 May 2014MACA/1962/2010

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In a motor accident claims appeal, the High Court modified the Tribunal's award allowing additional compensation for loss of transport, loss of earnings, bystanders' expenses, and permanent disability based on a 22% medical board assessment, totaling an extra Rs. 1,44,640.

What did the court decide?

The appellant entitled to additional compensation of Rs. 1,44,640/- with interest at 7% p.a. The impugned award modified; Respondent-II to deposit the amount within three months.

C.K.Baiju Vs the Secretary, Feroke Grama Panchayat — Motor Accident Claims | Kerala HC (2014)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT:

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE HARUN-UL-RASHID & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL K.NARENDRAN

¶4

WEDNESDAY, THE 21ST DAY OF MAY 2014/31ST VAISAKHA, 1936B

¶5

MACA.No.1962 of 2010 (C)

¶6

AGAINST THE AWARD IN OP(MV).168/2006 of Prl.M.A.C.T., KOZHIKODE DATED 16-12-2009

¶7

APPELLANT/PETITIONER:

¶8

C.K.BAIJU, S/O.GOPI,

¶9

AGED 30 YEARS, RESIDING AT CHEROOLKUNNATH HOUSE, P.O.FEROKE, KOZHIKODE.

¶10

BY ADVS.SRI.V.S.CHANDRASEKHARAN SMT.LEKSHMI SWAMINATHAN

¶11

RESPONDENTS : RESPONDENTS :

¶12

THE SECRETARY (SPECIAL GRADE), FEROKE GRAMA PANCHAYATH, P.O.FEROKE, KOZHIKODE-673 631.

¶13

KERALA STATE INSURANCE DEPARTMENT, DISTRICT INSURANCE OFFICE, WOOD WORKSHOP BUILDING, PUTHIYARA, KOZHIKODE-673 004.

¶14

R2 BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER SMT.ROSE MICHAEL

¶15

R1 BY ADV. SRI.V.G.ARUN R1 BY ADV. SRI.T.R.HARIKUMAR BY ADV.T.K.SHIBU

¶16

THIS MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS APPEAL HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 21-05-2014, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

¶17

HARUN-UL-RASHID & ANIL K.NARENDRAN, JJ.

¶18

M.A.C.A.No.1962 of 2010

¶19

Dated this the 21^st day of May, 2014

¶20

JUDGMENT

¶21

HARUN-UL-RASHID, J.

¶22

The claimant is the appellant. The appeal is directed against the award dated 16/12/2009 in O.P.(M.V.)No.168 of 2006 on the file of the M.A.C.T., Kozhikode. The Tribunal passed an award allowing the claimant to realise ₹1,35,374/as compensation due to the injuries sustained by him in the accident that took place on 25/9/2005. Aggrieved by the quantum of compensation awarded, the claimant has preferred this M.A.C.A. While the petitioner was riding his motorcycle, he was hit by a jeep and as a result suffered serious injuries. He was treated at Medical College Hospital, Calicut for the first four days and thereafter 17 days in the Specialist Hospital in Ernakulam. The petitioner produced Exts.A1 to A6 documents. The injuries certified are degloving injury (L) foot with heel pad avulsion and fracture 2^nd and 5^th metatarsal.

¶23

M.A.C.A.No.1962 of 2010

¶24

¶25

Ext.A2 is the wound certificate. Ext.A3 is the prescription issued from the Specialist Hospital. Exts.A4 and A5 are lab report and investigation report respectively. The Tribunal awarded ₹1,10,374/- towards treatment expenses incurred by the claimant. The court declined to grant any compensation for permanent disability and loss of income, finding that claimant failed to produce evidence in support of the claim. The court below awarded ₹1,35,374/- under 8 heads. The facts and circumstances show that the petitioner was taken to Kozhikode Medical College for treatment and subsequently he was admitted in the Specialist Hospital, Ernakulam. ₹750/- as compensation awarded under the head transport to hospital is too low. We are of the view that the claimant is entitled to an additional compensation of ₹3,000/- under this head. The claimant was treated as inpatient in two hospitals for a period of 21 days. Considering the injuries sustained by him, it may not be possible for him to resume any work atleast for a period of three months. Under the head ‘the loss of earnings’ the Tribunal awarded ₹3,000/-. We are allowing the claimant to

¶26

M.A.C.A.No.1962 of 2010

¶27

¶28

realise ₹6,000/- as additional compensation under this head. Towards bystanders expense only ₹1,000/- was allowed. We re-fix the compensation under this head as ₹2,000/- deducting ₹1,000/- awarded.

¶29

Considering his plea, that he is entitled to compensation under the head permanent disability, this Court by order dated 1^st January, 2014, directed the appellant to appear before the Superintendent of Medical College, Calicut for medical examination by the Medical Board. Pursuant to that, the claimant was clinically examined and the proceedings of the Medical College Hospital, Calicut was produced by the Chairman of Medical Board, Medical College Hospital, Calicut. After examination, the Medical Board found that the claimant is having post traumatic stiffness and deformity (L) foot and certified that the percentage of permanent disability due to the injury is 22%. Taking into consideration the fact that he is a worker earning a minimum ₹3,000/- per month, the compensation for permanent disability is worked out as ₹1,34,640/-. Following the Medical Board examination and

¶30

M.A.C.A.No.1962 of 2010

¶31

¶32

certificate, we find that the petitioner is entitled to compensation assessing his permanent disability at 22%. Thus, the claimant is entitled to an additional compensation of ₹1,44,640/-.

¶33

In the result, this appeal is partly allowed. The impugned award is modified. The appellant/claimant is entitled to an additional compensation of ₹1,44,640/- with interest @ 7% per annum from the date of petition till the date of deposit of the amount. There will be a direction to the second respondent to deposit additional compensation amount before the Tribunal within a period of three months from today. The appellant/claimant is entitled to withdraw the amount on deposit.

¶34

HARUN-UL-RASHID, JUDGE

¶35

ANIL K.NARENDRAN, JUDGE

¶36

skj

C.K.Baiju v. the Secretary, Feroke Grama Panchayat

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

C.K.Baiju v. the Secretary, Feroke Grama Panchayat

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 Sri. Thomas

Francis Vs Thankachan @ Thankan

State of Kerala, Rep. by District Collec Vs Soudhamini and Another