Allowed

Chellappan v. the Branch Manager

Kerala HC9 Nov 2016MACA/2457/2013

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Motor Accident Claims Tribunal (MACT) awarded compensation to an injured bike rider. The High Court held the Tribunal erred in assessing only 3% disability instead of the medically certified 19%. It enhanced the compensation for disability, loss of amenities, and pain and suffering, directing the insurer to deposit the additional sum.

What did the court decide?

Enhanced compensation of Rs. 55,200/- (including disability, loss of amenities, and pain and suffering) directed to be deposited by the insurer with interest at 9% per annum from the date of applicati

Chellappan Vs the Branch Manager — Motor Accident Claims | Kerala HC (2016)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT:

¶3

THE HONOURABLE SMT. JUSTICE P.V.ASHA

¶4

WEDNESDAY, THE 9TH DAY OF NOVEMBER 2016/18TH KARTHIKA, 1938

¶5

MACA.No. 2457 of 2013

¶6

OP(MV)395/2006 OF MOTOR ACCIDENTS CLAIMS TRIBUNAL, PUNALUR DATED 03-06-2013

¶7

APPELLANT/PETITIONER:

¶8

CHELLAPPAN, S/O.NARAYANAN, RESIDING AT BHASKARA VILASOM, AMBALAMKUNNU, VELINALLOOR VILLAGE.

¶9

BY ADVS.SRI.K.SIJU SMT.CHITHRA.S.BABU

¶10

RESPONDENT/3RD RESPONDENT:

¶11

THE BRANCH MANAGER, NEW INDIA ASSURANCE CO.LTD., KOLLAM-691001.

¶12

BY ADVS. SRI.N.S.MOHAMMED USMAN SRI.A.A.ZIYAD RAHMAN

¶13

THIS MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS APPEAL HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 09-11-2016, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

¶14

¶15

P.V.ASHA, J.

¶16

MACA No.2457 of 2013

¶17

Dated this the 9^th day of November, 2016

¶18

JUDGMENT

¶19

The injured is the appellant who filed this appeal seeking enhancement of compensation. The appellant sustained injuries in a motor vehicle accident occurred on 22.10.2004 on being hit by a Maruthi car while he was riding his bicycle. He was immediately taken to the St.Joseph's Hospital, Anchal where he underwent inpatient treatment from 22.10.2004 to 26.10.2004. As per Ext.P8 certificate issued by the Orthopaedic Surgeon at the Hospital it was stated that he sustained compression fracture of third lumbar vertebra and in Ext.A9 disability certificate issued by the Medical Board, District Hospital, Kollam his disability was assessed as 19% without specifying whether it was permanent or partial. Even though the disability certificate was disputed by the Insurance Company, no evidence was adduced by either of the parties.

¶20

The Tribunal found that the appellant was injured on account of the motor vehicle accident. However, seeing that none of the Doctors who issued Ext.P9 disability certificate was examined the Tribunal fixed the percentage of disability at 3%. The petitioner's grievance is as against this. Apart from that, it is also pointed out that

¶21

:2:

¶22

MACA No.2457 of 2013

¶23

the income reckoned is on a lower side and nothing is awarded towards loss of amenities.

¶24

I heard the learned counsel for the appellant who made available a copy of the disability certificate. It is seen that the disability Board examined the appellant on the basis of the direction from the MACT, Punalur and issued Ext.P9 certificate on 19.10.2011. The Medical Board found that the appellant sustained abrasion over the dorsum of the right foot above the big toe and was having pain and tenderness over the lumbar region. The accident was in 2004; the disability board issued the certificate in 2011. Nothing is stated in the award for reducing the disability. Just because the medical officers who issued the certificate were not examined, it cannot be said that the disability assessed cannot be accepted in evidence. Therefore I find that the reasoning of the Tribunal in fixing the disability at 3% as against the 19% assessed by the disability board, is without any basis.

¶25

Under the above circumstances, it is necessary to modify the award reckoning the disability as 19%, in terms of Ext.A9 certificate. As far as the income reckoned is concerned, I am of the view that the view taken by the Tribunal does not require any modification. However, the compensation under the Head of disability is enhanced from Rs.8100/- to Rs. 51300/- (2500 x 12 x 9 x 19%). Thus there will

¶26

MACA No.2457 of 2013

¶27

:3:

¶28

be an enhancement of Rs. 43200/-(51300- 8100) under the head of disability compensation. The Tribunal has not awarded any compensation towards loss of amenities. Since the appellant has been unable to enjoy the normal amenities of life on account of the injury sustained in the accident, I am of the view that a sum of Rs.8,000 /- can be awarded towards loss of amenities and the compensation awarded under the head of pain and suffering can also be enhanced from Rs.4,000/- to 8000/- . Accordingly there will be an enhancement of Rs.4,000/- under the above head. Thus the total enhancement will be by a sum of Rs.55,200/-, over and above the sum of Rs.17,805/already awarded by the Tribunal. The enhanced compensation of Rs.55,200/- shall carry interest at the rate of 9% per annum from the date of application. The insurance company is directed to deposit the amount before the Tribunal within a period of three months.

¶29

The appeal is allowed to the above extent. No cost.

Sd/-

P.V.ASHA

JUDGE

rkc

Chellappan v. the Branch Manager

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Chellappan v. the Branch Manager

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

Nobert Lawrence Vs Kottukl Grama Panchayath

G.Rajendran & Others Vs State of Kerala

Urban Co-Operative Bank Vs P.Moideen & Another

Jobish Mathew Vs B. Sreenivasan

Padmini Amma Vs State of Kerala

Shahanas P.T. and Another Vs Suranya Smrithy S. and Others