Research › Search › Judgment

Kerala High Court · body

2013 DIGILAW 662 (KER)

T. U. Shunmughan v. V. D. Salim

2013-07-31

THOMAS P.JOSEPH

body2013
Judgment : 1. This appeal arises from the award dated 04.06.2007 in O.P (M.V).No.2347 of 2000 of the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Ernakulam (for short, "the Tribunal"). The appellant while riding on the pillion of the motor cycle on 27.03.2000 sustained injuries. The Tribunal found that accident occurred due to the negligence of the second respondent who was riding the motor cycle, assessed compensation payable to the appellant at Rs. 17.,200/- and on a finding that Ext.B1, policy is only an Act only policy and did not cover liability of the pillion rider, exonerated the third respondent from liability. The appellant was allowed to recover the amount with interest from the respondents 1 and 2. The appellant is aggrieved. 2. Learned counsel submitted that quantum of compensation awarded is low. It is also argued that Ext.B1, policy being a comprehensive policy, it covers liability of pillion rider as well and hence exoneration of the third respondent is illegal. 3. Learned counsel for the third respondent contended that there is no scope for any further enhancement. 4. The appellant was aged 36 years at the relevant time, a casual labourer. In the absence of evidence the Tribunal fixed his monthly income at Rs.2500/- which I find no reason to interfere. 5. Paragraph 8 of the award states injuries suffered by the appellant. It includes an undisplaced fracture of medial malleolus on the left side. The appellant underwent inpatient treatment for four days and continued OP treatment. POP was removed on 20.04.2000 and he was advised rest for three months. 6. The Tribunal awarded loss of earnings only for one month. Having regard to the nature and site of injuries and period of inpatient and outpatient treatment, it is possible that the appellant was not able to work for three months and suffered loss. Loss of earnings comes to Rs.7500/-. Less Rs.2500/- already awarded, additional compensation on that count comes to Rs.5000/-. 7. The Tribunal awarded a consolidated sum of Rs.2,000/-for transportation charges, extra nourishment, damage to clothing and by stander's expenses. I am inclined to think that the amount awarded is on the lower side. Having regard to the site and nature of injuries and the period of treatment including period of hospitalization I am inclined to award a further sum of Rs.1000 on those counts. 8. I am inclined to think that the amount awarded is on the lower side. Having regard to the site and nature of injuries and the period of treatment including period of hospitalization I am inclined to award a further sum of Rs.1000 on those counts. 8. Medical expenses awarded as per the bills is only Rs.700/- which also appears to be on the lower side. Having regard to the circumstances, a further sum of Rs.1000/- is awarded on that count. 9. Compensation awarded for loss of enjoyment of amenities of life consequent to the discomfort arising from the undisplaced fracture is only Rs.3,000/- and appears to be on the lower side having regard to the age of the appellant and his occupation. Hence a further sum of Rs.4,000/-is awarded on that count. The additional compensation payable to the appellant comes to Rs.11,000/-. That amount will carry interest @9% per annum from the date of application till realisation. 10. As regards liability of the third respondent it is contended that Ext.B1, policy is a comprehensive policy. Learned counsel has given me a copy of the policy. It is seen that it is a B policy covering own damage as well. It is therefore clear that Ext.B1 is a comprehensive policy and as such it should cover liability of gratuitous passengers like pillion rider on the motor cycle. In that view the Tribunal was wrong in exonerating the third respondent. The third respondent is liable to pay the amount. Resultantly this appeal is allowed in part as under: (i) In modification of the award dated 04.06.2007 in O.P(M.V).No.2347 of 2000 of the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Ernakulam the appellant is allowed to recover a further sum of Rs.11,000/-/-(Rupees Eleven Thousand Only) with interest @9% per annum from the date of application till recovery from the respondents 1 to 3. (ii) Finding of the Tribunal that the third respondent is not liable is set aside. (iii) The third respondent is directed to deposit the amount awarded by the Tribunal and the additional compensation awarded by this Court within two months from this day. (iv) Direction regarding withdrawal/deposit of compensation shall be issued by the Tribunal. (v) Parties are directed to suffer their cost in the appeal.