The High Court of Kerala enhanced compensation awarded to an injured heavy vehicle driver. The Court adjusted income and disability calculations, granting additional damages for loss of income, pain and suffering, amenities, and permanent disability.
Enhanced compensation awarded to Rs. 95,220 with 7% interest; insurer to pay within 30 days or face 12% interest.
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 P.D.RAJAN
TUESDAY, THE 26TH DAY OF JUNE 2018 / 5TH ASHADHA, 1940
MACA.No. 296 of 2009
AGAINST THE AWARD IN OPMV 2088/2000 of ADD. MACT,ERNAKULAM DATED 18-02-2008
APPELLANT/PETITIONER
KESAVAN NAIR , AGED 63 YEARS, S/O.GOVINDAN NAIR, PULLICKAL HOUSE,, KARIKODE, MULANTHURUTHY.
BY ADVS.SRI.P.M.JOSHI SRI.JINU JOHN
RESPONDENTS/RESPONDENTS:
*2. K.A.SALAJA,KUNNATHUPARAMBIL HOUSE - DELETED EROOR,TRIPUNITHURA.
3. THE UNITED INDIA INSURANCE CO.LTD TRIPUNITHURA BRANCH.
( R1 AND R2 ARE DELETED FROM THE PARTY ARRAY AT THE RISK OF THE APPELLANT AS PER IA NO.3915/2017 DATED 26.06.2018 IN MACA NO.296/2009)*
THIS MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS APPEAL HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 26-06-2018, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
BNG
P.D.RAJAN, J
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - M.A.C.A No.296 of 2009
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Dated this the 26th day of June, 2018
JUDGMENT
This appeal is preferred against the award in OP(MV) No.2088/2000 of the Addl. Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Ernakulam by the injured. The appellant sustained injuries in a motor accident on 26.05.2000 and the learned Tribunal awarded Rs.82,670/- as compensation. Being aggrieved by that, the injured preferred this appeal.
M.A.C.A No.3510 of 2017
-2-
permanent disability case would differ from person to person according to the nature of injury. Vast discretion is vested with the court for assessment of just compensation in injury cases. There can be no uniform standard and yardstick provided for assessing such compensation. When two persons sustain similar injury, that can attract the same compensation, but the heads under which, compensation can be attributed are truly amazing. The scope for awarding general damages and special damages are too wide for articulation. It is settled law that compensation for injury claims would be higher than that in death cases. The reason is that the injured has to suffer disability for the remaining period of his life. Generally in practical terms it is found that discretion vested in assessment has to be on the basis of injury sustained to the victim and also on the nature of evidence in that case.
Prakash Goel (2017 ACJ 2057) , in the absence of any contra evidence, the income is taken as Rs.4,500/-. The
M.A.C.A No.3510 of 2017
-3-
appellant was 55 years at the time of accident and multiplier is 11. Hence, the following amount is awarded as enhanced compensation. Loss of income for six months is Rs.27,000/-. The learned Tribunal awarded Rs.7,500/-. The balance is Rs.19,500/-. For pain and suffering additional Rs.5,000/-, for loss of amenities Rs.7,000/- and for permanent disability is Rs.63,720/(Rs.4,500x12x11x18/100= Rs.1,06,920 - Rs.43,200). Therefore, the appellant is entitled to get enhanced compensation of Rs.95,220/- (Rupees Ninety Five Thousand and Two Hundred and Twenty only) with 7% interest and proportionate cost in addition to the award amount. The insurer is directed to satisfy the award within 30 days from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment, failing which it will carry 12% interest from the date of default.
This appeal is disposed of, accordingly.
Sd/-
P.D.RAJAN
JUDGE
bng
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal erred in assmarng injury compensation given the appellant's actual income and extent of disability.
Whether the domestic contractor to permit additional compensation for loss of earnings and permanent disability.
Colour shows how this judgement treated each authority
Dixit Kumar and Ors. v. OM Prakash GoelRelied on¶29
Dixit Kumar and Ors. v. OM Prakash Goel (2017 ACJ 2057)
1 provisions across 1 enactments
KESAVAN NAIR
THE UNITED INDIA INSURANCE CO.LTD TRIPUNITHURA BRANCH
P.D. Rajan
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
P.D. Rajan
Parties & counsel
