The court re-fixed the notional monthly income of the appellant to Rs.7,500/- and modified the total compensation to Rs.2,85,268/- based on injuries sustained and income loss, reaffirming the necessity for accurate assessment in personal injury claims.

JUDGMENT :

Shoba Annamma Eapen, J.

This appeal has been filed by the claimant in OP(MV) No.527 of 2010 on the file of the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Punalur. The respondents herein are the respondents before the Tribunal.

2. According to the appellant, on 08.05.2010 at 3.00 p.m., while he was riding a motorcycle bearing registration No.KL- 25/6748 through Punalur – Pathanapuram public road, a lorry bearing registration No.KL-5T/7327 driven by the second respondent in a rash and negligent manner hit at the back side of the scooter and as a result, the appellant sustained serious injuries. The appellant approached the Tribunal claiming a total compensation of Rs.2,50,000/-.

3. The first, second and third respondents are the owner, driver and the insurer of the offending vehicle respectively before the Tribunal. Though notice was served on the respondents, the first and second respondents remained absent and were set ex parte and the third respondent filed a written statement, admitting the insurance policy denying the liability and quantum of compensation claimed, before the Tribunal. They contended that the accident occurred due to the negligence on the part of the appellant. The petitioner took a sudden deviation towards the northern side of the road and as a result, the accident happened. The Tribunal, after analysing the pleadings and materials on record, awarded a sum of Rs.97,008/- rounded to Rs.97,010/- as compensation under different heads with interest @ 7.5% per annum from the date of petition till realization. Dissatisfied with the quantum of compensation awarded by the Tribunal, the claimant has come up in appeal.

4. Heard the learned counsel for the appellant and the learned Standing Counsel for the respondent insurer.

5. The learned counsel for the appellant claims enhancement mainly under the following heads:-

I. Notional Income

The learned counsel for the appellant submits that though the appellant had claimed an amount of Rs.5,000/- as the monthly income, who was an agriculturist, the Tribunal had granted only an amount of Rs.3,500/-. The learned counsel for the appellant further submits that even going by the judgment in Ramachandrappa v. Manager, Royal Sundaram Alliance Insurance Co. Ltd. [ 2011 (13) SCC 236 ], the monthly income ought to have been taken at Rs.7,500/-. I find force in the said argument. Following the judgment in Ramachandrappa (Supra), I am inclined to re-fix the notional monthly income of the appellant at Rs.7,500/- (Rupees Seven Thousand Five Hundred Only).

II. Loss of earnings

The learned counsel for the appellant submitted that the Tribunal has taken only a period of two months for awarding compensation under the head loss of earnings. Following are the injuries sustained by the appellant:

i) Fracture 3^rd to 8^th ribs on right side

ii) Fracture 2^nd & 4^th ribs on left side

iii) Fracture dislocation little finger

iv) Fracture middle phalanx 4th finger and other injuries

Considering the avocation and nature of injuries sustained, I find that a period of five months can be taken for awarding compensation under the said head would be just and reasonable. Since the notional monthly income has been re- fixed at Rs.7,500/-, the total compensation payable under the said head would be Rs.37,500/- (7,500 x 5). The Tribunal had already awarded an amount of Rs.7,000/- under the said head. Thus there will be an additional amount of Rs.30,500/- (Rupees Thirty Thousand Five Hundred Only) under the said head.

III. Compensation for pain and suffering:

The learned counsel for the appellant submitted that though an amount of Rs.30,000/- was claimed towards the head pain and sufferings, the Tribunal had granted only an amount of Rs.10,000/-. Considering the age and nature of injuries susta