Research › Search › Judgment

Kerala High Court · body

2025 DIGILAW 1415 (KER)

Sasidharan Nair v. Babu Sebastian

2025-05-23

SHOBA ANNAMMA EAPEN

body2025
JUDGMENT : Shoba Annamma Eapen, J. This appeal has been filed by the claimant in OP(MV) No.527 of 2010 on the file of the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Punalur. The respondents herein are the respondents before the Tribunal. 2. According to the appellant, on 08.05.2010 at 3.00 p.m., while he was riding a motorcycle bearing registration No.KL- 25/6748 through Punalur – Pathanapuram public road, a lorry bearing registration No.KL-5T/7327 driven by the second respondent in a rash and negligent manner hit at the back side of the scooter and as a result, the appellant sustained serious injuries. The appellant approached the Tribunal claiming a total compensation of Rs.2,50,000/-. 3. The first, second and third respondents are the owner, driver and the insurer of the offending vehicle respectively before the Tribunal. Though notice was served on the respondents, the first and second respondents remained absent and were set ex parte and the third respondent filed a written statement, admitting the insurance policy denying the liability and quantum of compensation claimed, before the Tribunal. They contended that the accident occurred due to the negligence on the part of the appellant. The petitioner took a sudden deviation towards the northern side of the road and as a result, the accident happened. The Tribunal, after analysing the pleadings and materials on record, awarded a sum of Rs.97,008/- rounded to Rs.97,010/- as compensation under different heads with interest @ 7.5% per annum from the date of petition till realization. Dissatisfied with the quantum of compensation awarded by the Tribunal, the claimant has come up in appeal. 4. Heard the learned counsel for the appellant and the learned Standing Counsel for the respondent insurer. 5. The learned counsel for the appellant claims enhancement mainly under the following heads:- I. Notional Income The learned counsel for the appellant submits that though the appellant had claimed an amount of Rs.5,000/- as the monthly income, who was an agriculturist, the Tribunal had granted only an amount of Rs.3,500/-. The learned counsel for the appellant further submits that even going by the judgment in Ramachandrappa v. Manager, Royal Sundaram Alliance Insurance Co. Ltd. [ 2011 (13) SCC 236 ], the monthly income ought to have been taken at Rs.7,500/-. I find force in the said argument. The learned counsel for the appellant further submits that even going by the judgment in Ramachandrappa v. Manager, Royal Sundaram Alliance Insurance Co. Ltd. [ 2011 (13) SCC 236 ], the monthly income ought to have been taken at Rs.7,500/-. I find force in the said argument. Following the judgment in Ramachandrappa (Supra), I am inclined to re-fix the notional monthly income of the appellant at Rs.7,500/- (Rupees Seven Thousand Five Hundred Only). II. Loss of earnings The learned counsel for the appellant submitted that the Tribunal has taken only a period of two months for awarding compensation under the head loss of earnings. Following are the injuries sustained by the appellant: i) Fracture 3 rd to 8 th ribs on right side ii) Fracture 2 nd & 4 th ribs on left side iii) Fracture dislocation little finger iv) Fracture middle phalanx 4th finger and other injuries Considering the avocation and nature of injuries sustained, I find that a period of five months can be taken for awarding compensation under the said head would be just and reasonable. Since the notional monthly income has been re- fixed at Rs.7,500/-, the total compensation payable under the said head would be Rs.37,500/- (7,500 x 5). The Tribunal had already awarded an amount of Rs.7,000/- under the said head. Thus there will be an additional amount of Rs.30,500/- (Rupees Thirty Thousand Five Hundred Only) under the said head. III. Compensation for pain and suffering: The learned counsel for the appellant submitted that though an amount of Rs.30,000/- was claimed towards the head pain and sufferings, the Tribunal had granted only an amount of Rs.10,000/-. Considering the age and nature of injuries sustained by the appellant, I find it appropriate to enhance the total compensation payable under the aforehead at Rs.25,000/-. Thus there will be an additional amount of Rs.15,000/- (Rupees Fifteen Thousand Only) under the afore head. IV. L oss of amenities in life On a perusal of the award, no amount was claimed by the appellant under the head loss of amenities. As a result of the accident the appellant could not enjoy his life for a certain period and considering the age and the nature of injuries sustained by the appellant, I find it appropriate to award an amount of Rs.20,000/- (Rupees Twenty Thousand Only) under the afore head. As a result of the accident the appellant could not enjoy his life for a certain period and considering the age and the nature of injuries sustained by the appellant, I find it appropriate to award an amount of Rs.20,000/- (Rupees Twenty Thousand Only) under the afore head. V. Compensation for permanent disability The learned counsel for the appellant submits that as per Ext.A8 disability certificate issued by the Medical College Hospital, Thiruvananthapuram, the percentage of permanent disability was assessed at 18% as per the McBride Scale. However, the Tribunal had reduced the percentage of disability to 12%. It is true that the doctor who issued the certificate was not examined, but it is a fact the certificate was issued by the Government Doctor, who was an Orthopaedic Surgeon. I do not find any reason to disbelieve Ext.A8 disability certificate issued as per McBride Scale. Since the disability of the appellant was assessed at 18%, I am inclined to fix the permanent disability of the appellant at 18%. Since the notional income has been fixed at Rs.7,500/-, the total compensation payable under the afore head is recalculated thus: Rs.1,78,200/- (7,500 x 12 x 11 x 18/100). The Tribunal has awarded an amount of Rs.55,440/-. Thus, there will be an additional amount of Rs.1,22,760/- (Rupees One Lakh Twenty Two Thousand Seven Hundred and Sixty Only) under the said head. 6. Though the appellant claimed enhancement of compensation under other heads, on a perusal of the records available, I am not inclined to interfere with the compensation awarded by the Tribunal under other heads since it appears to be just and reasonable. 7. Thus, the impugned award of the Tribunal is modified as follows: Sl. 6. Though the appellant claimed enhancement of compensation under other heads, on a perusal of the records available, I am not inclined to interfere with the compensation awarded by the Tribunal under other heads since it appears to be just and reasonable. 7. Thus, the impugned award of the Tribunal is modified as follows: Sl. No. Head of Claim Amount claimed (in Rs.) Amount awarded by the tribunal (in Rs.) Amount modified in appeal (in Rs.) Total compensation 1 Loss of earning 25,000 7,000 30,500 37,500 2 Transport to hospital and back 1,000 750 (not modified) 750 3 Extra nourishment 2,500 1,100 (not modified) 1,100 4 Damage to clothing and other articles 1,000 750 (not modified) 750 5 Cost of medicine and bystanders expenses 50,000 20,318 1,650 (not modified) 20,318 1,650 6 Compensation for pain and sufferings 30,000 10,000 15,000 25,000 7 Compensation for permanent disability and compensation for loss of earning power 1,00,000 40,500 55,440 1,22,760 1,78,200 8 Loss of amenities in life - - 20,000 20,000 Total amount 2,50,000 97,008 (rounded to 97,010 1,88,260 2,85,268 Accordingly, the appeal is allowed in part and the appellant/claimant is entitled for an additional compensation of Rs.1,88,260/- (Rupees One Lakh Eighty Eight Thousand Two Hundred and Sixty only) over and above the compensation awarded by the Tribunal with interest @ 7.5% per annum from the date of petition till realization and proportionate costs. The respondent insurer shall deposit the said amount together with interest and costs within a period of two months from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this judgment. The appellant shall furnish copies of the PAN Card, AADHAAR Card and bank details before the respondent insurer within a period of one month so as to enable the insurance company to make the deposit as ordered above. In case of failure to furnish details as above, it shall be open for the insurance company to deposit the said amount before the Tribunal. Upon such deposit being made, the entire amount shall be disbursed to the appellant at the earliest in accordance with law.