The legal standards for compensation awards in motor accident cases require reassessment of damages based on the claimant's actual needs and circumstances.

JUDGMENT

This appeal has been filed by the claimant in OP(MV) No.1154 of

2016 on the files of the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Muvattupuzha, claiming enhancement of compensation. The respondents herein were the respondents before the tribunal.

2. The case of the claimant was that on 07.09.2016, while he was walking along the Perumbavoor-Kolencherry road, a goods carriage bearing Reg.No.KL-8-AZ-4634 driven by the first respondent in a rash and negligent manner, hit him, whereby he sustained serious injuries. He approached the tribunal claiming a total compensation of ₹17,00,000/-.

3. Respondents 1 and 2, who are the driver and owner of the offending vehicle respectively, remained ex parte before the tribunal. The third respondent insurer filed a written statement, admitting the policy coverage for the offending vehicle, but disputing the liability and quantum of compensation claimed. Exts.A1 to A14 were marked. The tribunal, after analysing the pleadings and materials on record, held that the accident took place on account of the negligence of the driver of the offending vehicle and awarded a sum of ₹6,13,550/- as compensation under different heads with interest @ 6% per annum from the date of petition till realization, against the third respondent being the insurer. Dissatisfied with the quantum of compensation awarded by the tribunal, the claimant has come up in appeal.

4. I have 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 under the following heads:

5.1. Loss of amenities - Though the appellant claimed an amount of ₹3,00,000/- under this head, the tribunal awarded only ₹40,000/-, which, according to the appellant, is on the lower side. It is seen that the appellant sustained serious injuries including multiple fractures. Considering the injuries sustained by the appellant and the loss of enjoyment in life, I deem it appropriate to award a total compensation of ₹60,000/- towards loss of amenities. Thus, the appellant will be entitled to get an additional amount of ₹20,000/- towards loss of amenities.

5.2. Bystander expenses - The learned counsel for the appellant submits that the tribunal has taken only ₹250/- per day for 14 days towards bystander’s expenses, which is on the lower side. Considering the fact that the accident was in the year 2016, I deem it appropriate to take ₹400/- per day towards bystander’s expenses. Accordingly, he will be entitled to get a total compensation of ₹5,600/- (400 x 14) towards bystander expenses. Thus, there will be an additional compensation of ₹2,100/- under this head.

5.3. Extra nourishment - The learned counsel for the appellant submits that the appellant was hospitalized for a period of 14 days, however, the tribunal awarded only an amount of ₹2,000/- towards extra nourishment, which is on the lower side. Considering the fact that the accident was in the year 2016, I deem it appropriate to take ₹400/- per day towards extra nourishment. Accordingly, he will be entitled to get a total compensation of ₹5,600/- (400 x 14) towards extra nourishment. Thus, there will be an additional compensation of ₹3,600/- under this head.

6. Though the appellant claimed enhancement of compensation under other heads as well, on a perusal of the records available and the impugned award, I am not inclined to interfere with the same since it appears to be just and reasonable.

7. Since the appeal is of the year 2018, I fix interest on the enhanced compensation @ 7% per annum from the date of the claim petition till realization. Thus, the impugned award of the tribunal is modified as follows:

Accordingly, the appeal is allowed