Dixon vs Francis Paul, Sunny and Manager

P.Q. Barkath Ali, J.—Appellant is the claimant in O.P. (MV) No. 876/2000 on the file of Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Irinjalakuda. In this appeal, he challenges the judgment and award of the Tribunal dated June 6, 2006 awarding a compensation of Rs. 1,11,410/- for the loss caused to him on account of the injuries sustained by him in a motor accident.

The accident happened on February 25, 2000 at about 9.30 a.m. While the claimant was travelling in an Omni van bearing Reg. No. KL-8/P1319 along Thrissur-Palakkad Sector of NH 47 and reached at Chuvannamannu, due to the negligence of the driver of the van, second Respondent, the vehicle capsized. Alleging negligence against the second Respondent, the claimant filed the O.P. before the Tribunal u/s 166 of Motor Vehicles Act claiming a compensation of Rs. 2,00,000/-.

Respondents 1 and 2, the owner and the driver of the offending Omni van filed a written statement admitting the accident, but denied the liability. The third Respondent, the insurer of the offending Omni van filed a written statement admitting the policy.

PWs 1 and 2 were examined and Exts. A1 to A14 were marked on the side of the claimant before the Tribunal. Ext. B1 was marked by 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 Omni van by second Respondent and awarded a compensation of Rs. 1,11,410/- 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.

Heard the counsel for the Appellant/claimant and the counsel for the Insurance Company.

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.

The claimant sustained the following injuries in the accident:

Fracture body of lamina of C2 vertibra with spinal canal asymmetry, compression fracture D10 and D11 and neurological deficits. Head injury, lacerated wound scalp, left eye brow, left lower eyelid and left shoulder.

The Tribunal awarded a total compensation of Rs. 1,11,410/-. The break up of the compensation amount awarded is as under:

Cost of extra nourishment and wages to attendants - Rs. 1300/-

Medical expenses - Rs. 21,310/-

Transportation charge - Rs. 5,000/-

Permanent disability - Rs. 64,800/-

Loss of earnings - Rs. 6,000/-

Pain and suffering - Rs. 10,000/-

Loss of amenities and happiness in life -Rs. 3,000/-

Counsel for the claimant sought enhancement of compensation for the disability caused and on other heads.

The Tribunal took the monthly income of the claimant as Rs. 1,500/- and took the percentage of disability as 20% and adopted a multiplier of 18 and awarded Rs. 64,800/- for the disability caused. The claimant was aged 28 at the time of the accident and was employed as a Clerk 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. 3,000/-. The percentage of disability as 20% and the multiplier as 18 taken by the Tribunal are not seriously challenged. Thus calculated for the disability caused, the claimant is entitled to a compensation of Rs. 1,29,600/- (20% � 3000 � 12 � 18). Thus on this count, the claimant is entitled to an additional compensation of Rs. 64,800/-.

The Tribunal awarded Rs. 3,000/- for loss of amenities and enjoyment in life and Rs. 10,000/- for pain and suffering endured. Taking into consideration the nature of the injuries sustained by the claimant, we feel that a compensation of Rs. 15,000/- each for loss of amenities and enjoyment in life and for pain and suffering endured would be reasonable. As regards the compensation awarded under other heads, we find the same to be reasonable and therefore we are not disturbing the same.

There is another aspect in this case. The Tribunal awarded interest only '' 6% per annum which appears to be very low. The 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.

In the result, the claimant is found entitled to an additional compensation of Rs. 81,800/-. He 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.