Compensation for personal injury under motor accident claims is determined by a combination of notional earnings, severity of injuries, and established precedents.

JUDGMENT

This appeal is filed by the claimant in O.P (MV) No.1412 of

2009 on the file of the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Thrissur dissatisfied with the quantum of compensation awarded by the tribunal. The respondents herein are the respondents before the tribunal.

2. According to the claimant, on 19.12.2007 at about 07.45 am while the claimant was riding a motorcycle bearing reg. No. KL-46- A-1382, a bus bearing registration No.KL-08-R-4618 driven by the second respondent in a rash and negligent manner hit on the motorcycle. As a result of the accident, the claimant had sustained serious injuries. The claimant approached the tribunal claiming a total compensation of ₹25,00,000/-.

3. The first and second respondent/owner and driver of the offending jeep remained ex parte before the tribunal. The 3^rd respondent/insurer filed a written statement admitting the validity of the policy but disputing the quantum of compensation claimed. Before the tribunal, Exts.A1 to A11, Ext.B1 and Ext.X1 were marked. The tribunal, after analysing the pleadings and materials on record, awarded a sum of ₹10,73,820/- as compensation under different heads with interest @9% per annum from the date of petition till realization with proportionate costs against the 3^rd respondent being the insurer of the offending vehicle. 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 insurance company.

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

Notional income :- The learned counsel for the appellant submitted that though an amount of ₹7,000/- was claimed as the monthly income of the appellant who was a workshop worker, the tribunal has taken only an amount of ₹4,500/-. The learned counsel for the appellant further submitted that, as per the judgment in Ramachandrappa v. Manager, Royal Sundaram Alliance Insurance Co. Ltd. [2011 (13) SCC 236] , since the accident occurred in the year 2007, the notional income ought to have been fixed at ₹6,000/- per month. Following the judgment in Ramachandrappa (supra), in order to award a just compensation, I find it is appropriate to refix the monthly income as ₹6,000/-.

Loss of earnings :- The learned counsel for the appellant submitted that for awarding compensation under the afore head, the tribunal has taken only a period of five months. The claimant sustained serious injuries such as (1)Lacerated wound left temporal and occipital area, (2)Abrasion left knee and left feet and (3)Fracture left maxilla. The claimant was also diagnosed to have “multiloculated left temporoinsular pyogenic brain abscess”. Considering the nature of injuries sustained, I find that a period of eleven months can be taken for awarding compensation under the afore head. Since the monthly income is refixed at ₹6,000/-, the total compensation payable under the head is recalculated thus: ₹66,000/- (6,000x11). The tribunal has already awarded an amount of ₹22,500/- under the said head. Thus, there will be an additional amount of ₹43,500/- under the head loss of earnings.

Bystander expenses :- The learned counsel for the appellant submitted that the tribunal has awarded only an amount of ₹9,000/- towards bystander expenses. Considering the nature of injuries sustained, I find it appropriate to award a consolidated amount of ₹50,000/- towards bystander expenses. Therefore, there will be an additional amount of ₹41,000/- under the afore head.

Extra nourishment :- The learned counsel for the appellant submitted that the tribunal has awarded only an amount of ₹9,000/- towards extra nourishment. Considering the nature of injuries su