AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
Joseph Francis, J.—M.A.C.A. No. 1608 of 2012 is filed by the additional petitioners 2 to 4 in O.P. (M.V.) No. 1191 of 2008 and
M.A.C.A. No. 1715 of 2012 is filed by the petitioner in O.P. (M.V.) No. 1176 of 2008 on the file of the file of Motor Accident Claims Tribunal,
Ernakulam. The common case of the petitioners in the O.P. (M.V.)s is briefly as follows. The petitioner in O.P. (M.V.) No. 1176 of 2008 is the
husband of the original petitioner, Ajithakumari in O.P. (M.V.) No. 1191 of 2008. On 10.1.2008 the husband was travelling in a scooter along
with his wife Ajithakumari through the Aluva-Ernakulam National Highway from North to South and when they reached at Muttom, a mini lorry
driven by the second respondent in a rash and negligent manner hit on the scooter, as a result of which both the husband and wife sustained serious
injuries. Wife, Ajithakumari died on 3.12.2009 while undergoing treatment. First respondent was the owner of the mini lorry and third respondent
was the insurer. The original petitioner in O.P. (M.V.) No. 1191 of 2008 claimed Rs. 16,00,000/- as compensation. During the pendency of that
O.P., the petitioner Ajithakumari died on 3.12.2009 while undergoing treatment and therefore her husband, her two sons and her mother were
impleaded as additional petitioners 2 to 5 and the nature of claim was amended and the compensation claimed was enhanced to Rs. 27,00,000/-.
The petitioner/husband in O.P. (M.V.) No. 1176 of 2008 claimed Rs. 50,000/- as compensation.
In both the O.P. (M.V.)s respondents 1 and 2 remained ex-parte. Third respondent filed written statement admitting the policy of the mini lorry
and contended that the accident was not due to the negligence of the second respondent and that the compensation claimed in both the O.P.
(M.V.)s is exorbitant. Before the Claims Tribunal both the O.P. (M.V.)s were jointly tried and the petitioner in O.P. (M.V.) No. 1176 of 2008,
who was the additional second petitioner in O.P. (M.V.) No. 1191 of 2008 filed proof affidavit and Exts.A1 to 29 were marked. The Claims
Tribunal on considering the evidence on record found that the accident was due to the rash and negligent driving of the second respondent and
awarded a compensation of Rs. 19,41,345/- to the additional petitioners in O.P. (M.V.) No. 1191 of 2008 together with interest at the rate of 8%
per annum from the date of petition till the date of realisation from respondents 1 to 3 and the third respondent was directed to deposit the amount
as the insurer. In O.P. (M.V.) No. 1176 of 2008 Rs. 15,000/- was awarded as compensation to the petitioner together with interest at the rate of
8% per annum from the date of petition till the date of realisation from respondents 1 to 3 and the third respondent was ordered to deposit the
amount as the insurer. Being dissatisfied with the quantum of compensation awarded, the petitioner in O.P. (M.V.) No. 1176 of 2008 filed
M.A.C.A. No. 1715 of 2012 and the additional petitioners 2 to 4 in O.P. (M.V.) No. 1191 of 2008 filed M.A.C.A. No. 1608 of 2012. In the
Appeal Memorandum in M.A.C.A. No. 1608 of 2012 it is stated that the additional fifth petitioner in O.P. (M.V.) No. 1191 of 2008 died during
the pendency of the proceedings and the appellants are the only legal heirs of the deceased.
Heard the learned counsel for the appellants and learned counsel for the Insurance Company. Learned counsel for the appellants submitted that
the compensation awarded in both cases is on the lower side and that the appellants are entitled to get enhanced compensation. Learned counsel
for the Insurance Company supported the award in both the cases.
In O.P. (M.V.) No. 1191 of 2008 the Claims Tribunal awarded compensation under various heads as follows:
Heads Amount claimed (Rs) Amount awarded (Rs. )
Loss of dependency 6,00,000/- 3,51,000/- 3000x12-
1/4thx13
Transport and expenses10,000 5,000 Considering the frequent
admission for ten times.
Extra nourishment 15,000 15,000
Funeral expenses 25,000 7,500
Loss of earnings 60,000 60,000 @3000/ per mensem
Medical expenses 13,50,000 13,90,845/- Ext.A24 & 24 series
bills
Attendants expenses 20,000 20,000 Died after two years
Loss of estate 50,000 2,000
Compensation for pain 1,00,000 50,000
and sufferings
Compensation for loss Not claimed 30,000
of love and affection
Compensation for loss 25,000 10,000
of
consortium
TOTAL 19,41,345/-
There is no dispute that the original petitioner in O.P. (M.V.) No. 1191 of 2008 died due to the injuries sustained by her in the accident. There
is also no dispute that the due to the accident she was under treatment from 10.1.2008 till her death on 3.12.2009 (about two years). Ext.A24 and
A24 series are the medical bills for Rs. 13,90,845/-. Based on Ext.A24 and A24 series bills the Claims Tribunal awarded Rs. 13,90,845/-
towards medical expenses. Considering the prolonged treatment for about two years, we award Rs. 50,000/- as attendant expenses in place of
Rs. 20,000/- awarded by the Tribunal. Rs. 10,000/- claimed towards transportation expenses is awarded, in the place of Rs. 5,000/- awarded by
the Tribunal. Rs. 10,000/- is awarded as funeral expenses in the place of Rs. 7,500/- awarded by the Tribunal. Considering the nature of injuries
sustained and prolonged treatment, Rs. 1,00,000/- claimed towards compensation for pain and suffering is allowed in the place of Rs. 50,000/-
awarded by the Tribunal. Rs. 20,000/- can be awarded towards compensation for loss of consortium instead of Rs. 10,000/- awarded. The
compensation awarded under other heads is reasonable. Thus in total, the appellants in M.A.C.A. No. 1608 of 2012 are entitled to get Rs.
97,500/- as additional compensation. In the accident, the petitioner in O.P. (M.V.) No. 1176 of 2008 sustained the following injuries. Swelling of
dorsum of left hand, comminuted fracture 3rd meta carpel left hand. Ext.A26 is the wound certificate issued from Ernakulam Medical Centre,
which shows that due to the accident the petitioner sustained the above mentioned injuries. He was treated as O.P. At the time of the accident, the
appellant/petitioner was an employee of Cochin Shipyard and he retired from service on 28.2.2011. Ext.A28 is the details of leave particulars of
the appellant from 10.1.2008 to 31.12.2009. As observed by the Claims Tribunal, the appellant might have taken leave in connection with the
treatment of his wife who died on 3.12.2009 due to the injuries sustained by her in the same accident. Considering the nature of injuries sustained
by the appellant, we are of the view that the Claims Tribunal awarded reasonable compensation of Rs. 15,000/- to the appellant. Therefore
M.A.C.A. No. 1715 of 2012 filed by him has to be dismissed, as it is without any merits.
Accordingly M.A.C.A. No. 1175 of 2012 is dismissed without costs. M.A.C.A. No. 1608 of 2012 is allowed in part and the appellants are
allowed to realise an additional compensation of Rs. 97,500/- together with interest at the rate of 7.5% per annum from the date of petition till the
date of realisation from the respondents and the third respondent is directed to deposit the amount as the insurer within three months from this date.
The enhanced compensation awarded will be apportioned among the appellants equally. There is no order as to costs.