Kerala High Court
Miss Sandhya K.S. D/O.Kollamparambil vs M.K.Francis on 11 February, 2011
Bench: A.K.Basheer, P.Q.Barkath Ali
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
MACA.No. 14 of 2005()
1. MISS SANDHYA K.S. D/O.KOLLAMPARAMBIL
... Petitioner
Vs
1. M.K.FRANCIS, S/O.K.KOCHAPPU,
... Respondent
2. CHANDRAN, S/O.NEELAKANDAN, VAAKOOTTIL
3. THE ORIENTAL INSURANCE CO.LTD.,
For Petitioner :SRI.V.BINOY RAM
For Respondent : No Appearance
The Hon'ble MR. Justice A.K.BASHEER
The Hon'ble MR. Justice P.Q.BARKATH ALI
Dated :11/02/2011
O R D E R
A.K.BASHEER & P.Q.BARKATH ALI, JJ.
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
M.A.C.A.No.14 OF 2005
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Dated this the 11th day of February, 2011
JUDGMENT
Barkath Ali, J.
Appellant is the claimant in O.P.(MV)No.894/2000 on the file of Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Irinjalakuda. In this appeal, she challenges the judgment and award of the Tribunal dated April 30,2004 awarding a compensation of Rs.1,25,600/- for the loss caused to her on account of the injuries sustained by her in a motor accident. She sustained the following injuries in that accident that occurred on June 7, 2000 at about 8 a.m.:
1.Fracture of bilateral parasymphisis Mandible.
2.Fracture zygomatic orbital complex.
3.Fracture anterior postero wall of maxillary sinus.
4.Fracture lateral orbit.
5.Diffuse white matter oedema.
2. The accident happened while the claimant was travelling in the bus bearing Reg.No.KL-8/C 3771 from Irinjalakuda to Kodungallur driven by the second respondent. When she reached at Karupadanna, MACA.No.14/2005 2 the driver of the bus applied sudden brake and as a result of which the claimant thrown out of the bus and sustained serious injuries. Alleging negligence against the second respondent, the claimant filed the O.P. before the Tribunal under Section 166 of Motor Vehicles Act claiming a compensation of Rs. 3,00,000/-.
3. Respondents 1 and 2, the owner and the driver of the offending bus remained absent before the Tribunal. The third respondent, the insurer of the offending bus filed a written statement admitting the policy.
4. Pws 1 to 4 were examined and Exts.A1 to A16 were marked on the side of the claimant before the Tribunal. Ext.B1 was marked on the side of the contesting third respondent. The Tribunal on an appreciation of evidence found that the accident occurred due to the rash and negligent driving of the offending bus by second respondent and awarded a compensation of Rs. 1,25,600/- with interest @ 6% per annum from the date of petition till realisation and proportionate cost. The claimant has now come up in appeal challenging the quantum of compensation awarded by the Tribunal. MACA.No.14/2005 3
5. Heard the counsel for the appellant/claimant and the counsel for the Insurance Company.
6. The accident is not disputed. The finding of the Tribunal that the accident occurred due to the negligence on the part of the second respondent is not challenged in this appeal. Therefore, the only question which arises for consideration is whether the claimant is entitled to any enhanced compensation.
7. The Tribunal awarded a total compensation of Rs.1,25,600/-. The break up of the compensation amount awarded is as under:
Loss of earnings - Rs.9,000/-
Transportation - Rs.1,000/-
Medical expenses - Rs.42,500/-
Bystander expenses - Rs. 500/-
Disability - Rs. 48,600/-
Pain and suffering - Rs. 13,000/-
Loss of amenities - Rs. 11,000/-
8. Counsel for the claimant sought enhancement of compensation for the disability caused, for pain and suffering endured, for disfigurement caused and for loss of amenities and enjoyment of life.
MACA.No.14/2005 4
9. The Tribunal took the monthly income of the claimant as Rs.1,500/- and took the percentage of disability as 15% and adopted a multiplier of 18 and awarded Rs. 48,600/- for the disability caused. According to the claimant, she was aged 28 at the time of accident and as a tailor earning Rs.3,000/- per month. Taking into consideration the above aspect, we feel that the monthly income of the claimant can be reasonably fixed at Rs. 2,500/-. Due to the injuries sustained the claimant developed psychiatric and Neuro problems as evidenced by Ext.A6, the certificate of disability issued by PW4. PW3 the doctor who treated her testified that she has now paranoid schizophrenia. Therefore, the percentage of disability as 15% and the multiplier as 18 taken by the Tribunal appears reasonable. Thus calculated for the disability caused, the claimant is entitled to a compensation of Rs. 81,000/- ( 15% x 2500 x 12 x 18). Thus on this count, the claimant is entitled to an additional compensation of Rs.32,400/-.
10. The Tribunal awarded Rs.11,000/- for loss of amenities and enjoyment in life and Rs.13,000/- for pain and suffering endured by the claimant. Taking into consideration the nature of the injuries sustained MACA.No.14/2005 5 by the claimant, we feel that a compensation of Rs. 20,000/- for loss of amenities and enjoyment in life and Rs.20,000/- for pain and suffering endured by the claimant would be reasonable.
11. No compensation is seen awarded for the disfigurement caused to the claimant. Having regard to the nature of the injuries caused to the claimant, we feel that the claimant must have suffered serious disfigurement for which she is entitled to a compensation of Rs.10,000/-.
12. The Tribunal awarded Rs. 9,000/- towards loss of earnings for 6 months @ Rs. 1,500/- per month. As we have fixed the monthly income of the claimant as Rs. 2,500/-, she is entitled to a compensation of Rs. 15,000/- towards loss of earnings. Thus on this count, the claimant is entitled to an additional compensation of Rs. 6,000/-. As regards the compensation awarded under other heads, we find the same to be reasonable and therefore we are not disturbing the same.
13. There is another aspect in this case. The Tribunal awarded interest only @ 6% per annum which appears to be very low. The MACA.No.14/2005 6 claimant is entitled to interest @ 7.5% per annum from the date of petition till realisation for the compensation already awarded and also for the enhanced compensation.
14. In the result, the claimant is found entitled to an additional compensation of Rs. 64,400/-. She is entitled to interest @ 7.5% per annum from the date of petition till realisation for the compensation already awarded and also for the enhanced compensation and proportionate cost. The third respondent being the insurer of the offending vehicle shall deposit the amount before the Tribunal within two months from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment. The award of the Tribunal is modified to the above extent.
The Appeal is disposed of as found above.
A.K.BASHEER, JUDGE P.Q.BARKATH ALI, JUDGE sv.
MACA.No.14/2005 7 MACA.No.14/2005 8 MACA.No.14/2005 9