AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
Ramakrishna Pillai, J.—The appellant, a 43 year old Plumber who met with an accident on 19/02/04 approached the Tribunal claiming a sum of Rs. 3 lakhs as compensation against which the Tribunal awarded a sum of Rs. 1,13,595/- under various heads. Allegedly while the appellant was walking along the road, he was hit down by a motorcycle driven by the 2nd respondent. The 3rd respondent was the Insurer of the offending vehicle.
In this appeal, the appellant has challenged the adequacy of the compensation awarded to him.
We have heard the Learned Counsel for the appellant and the Learned Counsel for the 3rd respondent Insurance Company. We have also perused the impugned award.
Medical records reveal that the appellant sustained type II compound fracture to both bones of the left leg and lacerated wound on the left leg. Initial treatment was done at Medical College Hospital, Thiruvananthapuram from where he was evacuated to Matha Hospital, Thellakom. In Matha Hospital he underwent wound debridement and external fixation re-alignment. He was hospitalised for eight days.
Towards compensation for pain and suffering, the learned Tribunal awarded a sum of Rs. 15,000/- . However, considering the nature and gravity of the injury sustained by him we are of the view that he is entitled to get some more amount as compensation for pain and sufferings. Thus we award an additional sum of Rs. 10,000/- on that count.
Towards loss of amenities for the period of treatment and convalescence, the learned Tribunal has awarded a sum of Rs. 10,000/- . Presumably he might not have been able to move out for a considerable number of weeks. Hence, towards loss of amenities in life for the period during which he underwent treatment and had taken rest we award a sum of Rs. 5,000/- more.
It was submitted by the Learned Counsel for the appellant that though the appellant produced Ext.A15 certificate to show that he was earning a monthly income of Rs. 3,000/- , the same was not taken into account by the learned Tribunal and the notional income of the appellant was fixed at Rs. 2,000/- . Admittedly the appellant was a Plumber and he was aged 43 years at the time of the accident. The accident was of the year 2004. Presumably the appellant might have earned at least Rs. 3,000/- per month by engaging himself as Plumber. It is in evidence that his left leg was in P.O.P cut for about seven months. Hence, towards loss of earnings for seven months at the rate of Rs. 3,000/- per month, he is entitled to get a sum of Rs. 21,000/- . As the learned Tribunal has awarded only a sum of Rs. 6,000/- , we award an additional sum of Rs. 15,000/- as compensation for loss of earnings for seven months.
Towards bystander''s expenses, the appellant is entitled to get a sum of Rs. 1,600/- at the rate of Rs. 200/- per day. As the learned Tribunal has awarded a sum of Rs. 1,500/- we award an additional sum of Rs. 100/- to the appellant on that count.
Ext.A12 Disability Certificate was admitted in evidence which reveals that the appellant is having a permanent disability of 12%. The same was relied on by the learned Tribunal. However, for computing the compensation for permanent disability, the notional income of the appellant was fixed at Rs. 2,000/- . When the disability compensation is re-calculated adopting the monthly income of the appellant as Rs. 3,000/- and the percentage of disability made mention of in Ext.A12 Certificate, the appellant becomes entitled to get a total amount of Rs. 64,800/- as compensation for permanent disability out of which the learned Tribunal has awarded a sum of Rs. 43,200/- only. Thus the appellant becomes entitled to get an additional sum of Rs. 21,600/- on that count.
Thus in total the appellant is entitled to get a sum of Rs. 51,700/- over and above what has been awarded by the learned Tribunal. The amount awarded shall carry interest at the same rate awarded by the Tribunal in its award. The appeal is allowed. The impugned award shall stand modified as above.
order