AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
S. Siri Jagan, J.—The appellant suffered injuries to his leg and hand in an accident caused by the negligent driving of a vehicle driven and owned by respondents 1 and 2 and insured with 3rd respondent. The appellant filed O.P.(M.V).No. 3057/2005 before the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Thrissur, claiming compensation for the injuries and consequent disability sustained by the appellant. The Tribunal after finding negligence on the part of the driver of the vehicle, awarded compensation under various heads as follows:
Head of claim awarded
Amount
1
Transportation & Miscellaneous expenses
3,000.00
2
Medical expenses
25,000.00
3
Pain and suffering
15,000.00
4
Disability
43,200.00
5
Loss of amenities & enjoyment of life
13,000.00
Total
99,200.00
Dissatisfied with the quantum of compensation awarded by the Tribunal, the appellant has filed this appeal seeking enhanced compensation. The appellant submits that although the appellant was hospitalised for 24 days and the disability certificate certified that he was on plastercast for three-and-a-half months, no amount has been awarded for loss of earnings. It is further submitted that although the Tribunal had awarded Rs. 4,800/- as bystander''s expenses, that amount has not been included in the total compensation awarded while adding up the compensation under various heads. It is also submitted that no amount has been awarded for extra nourishment. It is the further contention of the appellant that the Tribunal erroneously refused to take the entire 9% whole body disability certified by the doctor, who was examined as PW1, for the purpose of calculating loss of earning capacity.
We have heard the learned counsel for the 3rd respondent insurance company also.
Since insurance is admitted, we do not think it necessary to issue notice to respondents 1 and 2. The matter is, therefore, heard and disposed of at the admission stage itself. Admittedly, the appellant was hospitalised for 24 days. He was in plastercast for quite some time. Although he had not given evidence to the effect that he lost income on account of the injuries in view of the above facts revealed from the documents available, we are inclined to grant the appellant three months'' salary as loss of earnings. Accordingly, the appellant would be entitled to Rs. 9,000/- towards compensation for loss of earnings. Although the Tribunal had assessed compensation of Rs. 4,800/- towards bystander''s expenses, while adding up the compensation under various heads, in the total, that amount was not included. Therefore, the appellant is entitled to Rs. 4,800/- towards bystander''s expenses. No amount has been awarded for extra nourishment. We award Rs. 2,000/- under that head. Ext.A1 disability certificate certifies 9% whole body disability. The appellant claims to be a mason by profession. He has disability to his leg and right ankle. That would naturally effect his profession as a mason to a great extent. The Tribunal has adopted only 8% as against 9% whole body disability certified by the doctor. We are inclined to take the entire 9% for the purpose of calculating loss of earning capacity. Calculated on that basis, the compensation for loss of earning capacity would be Rs. 48,600/- ( Rs. 3000 x 12 x 15 x 9%) instead of Rs. 43,200/-. Adding together, the appellant would be entitled to Rs. 21,200/- as additional compensation over and above what has been awarded by the Tribunal. The said amount would carry interest at the rate of 9% per annum from the date of the claim petition till date of payment. The 3rd respondent insurance company is directed to deposit that amount also within two months.
With the above modification of the impugned award of the Tribunal, this appeal is disposed of.