The court emphasized that compensation must adequately reflect the severity of injuries and the impact on the victim's life, rejecting the tribunal's unjustified reduction of disability assessment.

JUDGMENT :

(JOBIN SEBASTIAN, J.)

The petitioner in O.P.(MV) No. 1285 of 2016 on the file of the Additional Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal-III, Alappuzha, has preferred this appeal seeking enhancement of compensation awarded by the tribunal on account of the injuries sustained by him in a motor accident that occurred on 12.08.2016.

2. The case of the petitioner in brief is as follows:-

On 12.08.2016, at 9.30 p.m., while the petitioner was riding a motorcycle bearing registration No.KL-32-C-1702 through the eastern extremity of Alappuzha - Ernakulam National Highway, a car bearing registration No. KL-33-A-1060, driven by the 1^st respondent in a rash and negligent manner, hit on the motorcycle which the petitioner was riding. Due to the impact of the hit, the petitioner was thrown onto the road causing serious injuries on him.

3. The driver and owner of the offending car were arrayed as the 1^st and 2^nd respondents respectively, whereas, the insurer of the car was arrayed as the 3^rd respondent. The 3^rd respondent contested the petition by filing written statement mainly disputing the quantum of compensation claimed. However, the 3^rd respondent admitted insurance coverage for the car involved in the accident.

4. During trial, from the side of the petitioner Exts. A1 to A9 were produced and marked, but no oral evidence was adduced. The disability certificate issued by the medical board was marked as Ext. X1. No evidence whatsoever was produced from the side of the respondent.

5. After trial, the tribunal came to the conclusion that the accident occurred solely due to the rash and negligent driving of the car bearing registration No.KL-33-A-1060 by the 1^st respondent, and being the insurer, the 3^rd respondent was held liable to pay the compensation. The compensation was quantified at Rs. 2,89,220/- with interest at the rate of 9% per annum from the date of petition till realisation and proportionate costs. Dissatisfied with the compensation awarded by the tribunal, the petitioner has come up with this appeal.

6. I heard Sri. A.N.Santhosh, the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner, Sri.Gireesh Varma, the learned Standing Counsel for the respondent.

7. From the rival contentions raised, it is gatherable that the main dispute that revolves around this appeal is with respect to the quantum of compensation awarded by the tribunal. The learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that the compensation awarded by the tribunal under various heads is too meager, and such an amount was awarded without considering the gravity and nature of the injuries sustained by the petitioner in the accident. Per contra, the learned standing counsel for the respondent would submit that the compensation awarded by the tribunal under various heads is just, fair, and reasonable and warrants no interference.

8. A perusal of the award reveals that for the purpose of determining compensation under the head of permanent disability, the tribunal assessed the monthly income of the petitioner at Rs. 11,250/-. In the petition, it was claimed that the petitioner was a Mason by profession, earning a monthly income of Rs. 15,000/-. Apart from taking such a contention, no convincing evidence was produced from the side of the petitioner to substantiate his contention regarding his actual income. However, from the side of the petitioner, an identity card issued by the Kerala Construction Workers Welfare Fund Board, showing that he was a member of the welfare fund constituted for the benefit of the construction site employees was produced. It was mainly taking note of the said fact, the tribunal entered into a conclusion that the petitioner was a Mason by profession at the time of the accident and earning a monthly income of Rs. 11,250/-. I am of the view that the income assessed by the tribunal is reasonable.

9. In order to prove that the petitioner sustained permanent disability due to the injuries sustained in the accident, a disability certificate issued by a competent m