Allowed

John Joseph v. Babu and Others

Kerala HC17 Oct 2018MACA/3077/2008

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This Motor Accident Claims Appeal concerned the insufficiency of compensation awarded for head injuries sustained in a collision involving a motor cycle and a lorry. The High Court enhanced the award by considering the appellant's lost leave and the severity of the head injury, despite the absence of permanent disability.

What did the court decide?

Enhanced compensation of Rs.8,000/- for loss of earning, Rs.5,000/- for pain and suffering, and Rs.6,000/- for loss of amenities to be paid by the insurance company.

John Joseph Vs Babu and Others — Medical Negligence | Kerala HC (2018)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE P.R.RAMACHANDRA MENON

¶4

WEDNESDAY,THE 17TH DAY OF OCTOBER 2018 / 25TH ASWINA, 1940

¶5

MACA.No. 3077 of 2008

¶6

AGAINST THE AWARD IN OPMV 810/2004 of ADDL.M.A.C.T., KOTTAYAM DATED 28-01-2008

¶7

APPELLANT/PETITIONER:

¶8

JOHN JOSEPH E.D., S/O. DAVEED, EERATHARA HOUSE, THALAYAZHAM P.O., VAIKOM.

¶9

BY ADV. SRI.M.V.THAMBAN SRI.B.BIPIN SRI.R.REJI

¶10

RESPONDENTS/RESPONDENTS:

¶11

1 BABU, S/O. KUMARAN, PUNCHAVALLIYIL HOUSE, KULASEKHARAPURAM KARA, KADUTHURUTHY, KOTTAYAM.

¶12

2 V.L.THOMAS, VANCHITHANATHU HOUSE CHAKKAMPUZHA, KOTTAYAM.

¶13

3 THE DIVISIONAL MANAGER, NATIONAL INSURANCE CO.LTD., MAIN ROAD, PALAI,KOTTAYAM.

¶14

BY ADV. SRI.JOE KALLIATH

¶15

THIS MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS APPEAL HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 17.10.2018, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

¶16

MACA.No. 3077 of 2008

¶17

¶18

JUDGMENT

¶19

The quantum of compensation awarded by the Tribunal in respect of the injuries sustained by the appellant is stated as much on the lower side and hence the appeal seeking for enhancement.

¶20

Heard the learned counsel for the appellant as

¶21

well as the learned counsel for the respondent Insurance Company.

¶22

3. The appellant was riding a motor cycle bearing

¶23

No.TCC.86 on 06.06.2003, when there occurred a collision between the said motor cycle and a lorry bearing No.KL-5B-8818 driven by the first respondent, owned by the second respondent and insured by the third respondent. The appellant sustained injuries, which was sought to be compensated by filing the claim petition.

¶24

The evidence adduced before the Tribunal consists of Exts.A1 to A10. Nobody was examined from either side. Based on the materials on record, the Tribunal held that the accident was only because of the

¶25

negligence on the part of the driver of the lorry.

¶26

¶27

MACA.No. 3077 of 2008

¶28

Considering the employment of the appellant as

¶29

a Village Extension Officer at the relevant time and

¶30

the monthly salary certified as per Ext.A10, the

¶31

monthly income was reckoned as Rs.5020/-. A total compensation of Rs.25,200/- was awarded under different heads, which was directed to be satisfied with interest at the rate of 7% per annum .

¶32

discussed in paragraph 9 of the award, are in the

¶33

following terms:

¶34

lacerated wound 18 x 8 cm, left side of scalp fronto parietal region” ( sic)

¶35

different heads are as given below:

¶36

Head	Amount awarded
	(in Rs.)
Loss of earning	3000
Damage to clothing	500
Transportation charges	1000

¶37

MACA.No. 3077 of 2008

¶38

¶39

Medical expenses	5200
Bystander's expenses	1000
Extra nourishment	500
Loss of amenities	4000
Pain and suffering	10000
TOTAL	25200

¶40

There is a specific case for the appellant that he had to surrender Earned Leave for '49 days' in connection with the injuries, which aspect has not been successfully rebutted from the part of the respondents. As such, considering the submission made by the learned counsel for the appellant, this Court finds it appropriate to grant a sum of Rs.8000/towards loss of earning. After deducting a sum of Rs.3000/- awarded by the Tribunal, the balance payable comes to Rs.5000/-.

¶41

The appellant was admitted in the hospital for six days. Considering the nature of injuries sustained, particularly, head injury, this Court finds it appropriate to award a further sum of Rs.5000/- towards pain and suffering. Similarly, an additional sum of Rs.6000/- is awarded towards loss of amenities, though

¶42

MACA.No. 3077 of 2008

¶43

¶44

there is no permanent disability.

¶45

Thus, the total additional compensation payable comes to Rs.16,000/ -(Rupees sixteen thousand only), which requires to be satisfied with interest at

¶46

the rate of 7.5% per annum from the date of claim petition, till satisfaction. Since the policy is admitted, the respondent Insurance Company is directed to deposit the said amount before the Tribunal at the earliest, at any rate, within six weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of the judgment.

¶47

Appeal stands disposed of.

¶48

Sd/- P.R.RAMACHANDRA MENON, JUDGE.

/true copy/

P.S. TO JUDGE

MACA.No. 3077 of 2008

¶53

John Joseph v. Babu and Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

John Joseph v. Babu and Others

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

Mundasseri Kadeeja Vs Manchappulath Mohammed Shareef

Narasimha B. Vs Narayana Ballal

The National Insurance Co. Ltd. Vs C.Sanal and Others

Dinju Ram K.P. Vs K.K.Balan Nair

Mohammed Basil (Minor) Vs Abdul Saleem Vylisseri

C.Balakrishnan Vs P.P.Nazar