Varghese Kochouseph vs Saidali A.P., A.P. Rayin Hajee and The Branch Manager, United India Insurance Co. Ltd.

Pius C. Kuriakose, J.—The appellant who suffered comminuted fracture on both bones right leg, lacerated wound at right side of forehead measuring 2 c.m, fractured wound over out aspect of right leg mid region, punctured wound over post aspect bleeding, shortening of right lower limb, in a road traffic accident complains that the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal did not award him adequate compensation. Under the impugned award, the learned Tribunal fixed the total compensation payable to the appellant, who at the relevant time was working as technical assistant with Centre for Earth Science Studies was found to be eligible for a total amount of Rs. 1,21,183/- as compensation towards various heads. However, the Tribunal would accept the contention raised by the Insurance Company that there was contributory negligence on the part of the appellant also in the accident which resulted in the injuries. The appellant''s contribution was fixed at 50% and accordingly the learned Tribunal would order realisation of only Rs. 60,592/- by the appellant with interest at the rate of 6% per annum. In this appeal, the appellant contends that the compensation awarded by the Tribunal under various heads is inadequate. The appellant also challenges the finding of the Tribunal that there was contributory negligence on his part.

We have heard the submissions of the learned counsel for the appellant and also those of Sri. A. Mohammed Nazir, the learned Standing Counsel for the Insurance Company. Even though the learned counsel for the appellant very strenuously argued against the finding of the learned Tribunal regarding 50% contribution from the part of the appellant in the negligence which lead to the accident having perused the Scene Mahazar and other relevant materials we do not find any infirmity with the above finding. We confirm the finding of the learned Tribunal that the accident occurred due to 50% negligence on the part of the appellant and 50% negligence on the part of the driver of the jeep which was insured with the 3rd respondent Company.

We shall now deal with the question of correct compensation to be awarded to the appellant. Having seen the nature of injuries suffered by the appellant, we feel that the compensation awarded by the Tribunal towards pain and suffering is inadequate. We award to the appellant Rs. 10,000/- more towards pain and suffering. So also, we are convinced that the compensation awarded to the appellant towards loss of amenities is inadequate. We award to the appellant Rs. 10,000/- more towards loss of amenities. The appellant as already stated was working as a technical assistant in the Centre for Earth Science Studies. For awarding loss of earnings, the learned Tribunal accepted the appellant''s case regarding the monthly salary drawn by him. However, when it came to fixing disability compensation, the learned Tribunal adopted only a notional monthly income of Rs. 1,500/-. One of the arguments of the learned counsel for the appellant was that the above sum notionally adopted is too low. We find some force in the above submission and award a sum of Rs. 3,000/- as the notional monthly income of the appellant for fixing the disability compensation. The percentage of disability was found to be 12% and the learned Tribunal accepted the same. When disability compensation is re-worked adopting the correct multiplier which is applicable to the persons in the age group of the appellant, it will be found that there is inadequacy in the disability compensation awarded to the appellant. We award to the appellant Rs. 36,720/- more towards disability. Thus in total the additional compensation to which the appellant becomes eligible by virtue of this judgment is Rs. 56,720/-. As we have confirmed the finding regarding 50% contribution on the part of the appellant, the appellant can be awarded only 50% of the above amount which is Rs. 28,360/-.

Thus the appeal is allowed awarding to the appellant Rs. 28,360/- as additional compensation. This additional compensation amount will carry interest at the rate of 7%per annum from the date of petition till date of recovery. The appeal is allowed. No costs.