The court revised compensation awards based on established principles and injury severity, enhancing the claimant's compensation.

JUDGMENT

This appeal is filed by the claimant in O.P (MV) No.1416 of 2011 on the file of the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Irinjalakuda, claiming enhancement of compensation. The respondents herein are the respondents before the tribunal.

2. The case of the claimant is that on 25.11.2011, at about 7.00 p.m., while the claimant was riding a bicycle through Mupliyam-Kalkuzhy public road, a motorcycle bearing Registration No.KL-8/AJ-6753, ridden by the first respondent in a rash and negligent manner, hit the claimant. As a result of the said accident, the claimant sustained grievous injuries. The claimant approached the tribunal claiming a total compensation of ₹4,78,000/- limited to ₹2,00,000/-.

3. The first respondent/ owner-cum-driver remained ex parte before the tribunal. The second respondent/insurance company filed a written statement admitting the insurance policy but disputing the quantum of compensation claimed. It is further contended that the accident occurred only due to the negligent riding of the claimant. Before the tribunal, Exts.A1 to A7 and Ext.B1 were marked. The Tribunal, after analysing the pleadings and materials on record, awarded a compensation of ₹82,570/- under different heads with interest @8% per annum from the date of petition till realization, against the respondent being the insurer. 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 appellant has filed this appeal challenging compensation under the following heads:-

Notional income :- The learned counsel for the appellant submitted that, though an amount of ₹12,000/- was claimed as the income of the injured, who alleged to be a Toddy Taper worker, the tribunal had taken only an amount of ₹5,000/- as the monthly income. The learned Counsel further submits that even going by the judgment in Ramachandrappa v. Manager, Royal Sundaram Alliance Insurance Co. Ltd. [2011 (13) SCC 236] , the income of a Coolie for an accident in 2011 is fixed at ₹8,000/- and sought for enhancement of the income. In order to award a just and reasonable compensation and considering the principles laid down in Ramachandrappa (supra), I am inclined to re-fix the monthly income at ₹8,000/-

Loss of earnings:- The learned counsel for the appellant submitted that for awarding compensation under the head loss of earnings, the tribunal has taken only a period of four months. The claimant sustained the following injuries:-

(1) Severe Head Injury - comminuted fracture anterior.

(2) Medical and posterior lateral walls of both maxillary sinuses with involvement of the right pterygoid plate.

(3) Fracture right zygomatic arch.

(4) Both nasal bones and medial and lateral walls of right orbit - lefort fracture.

(5) Fracture lateral aspect of right supra orbital margin.

Considering the injuries sustained, I find that a period of seven months is adequate for awarding compensation under the head loss of earnings. Since the notional income is fixed as ₹8,000, I find that a total amount of ₹56,000/- (8,000 x 7) is payable under the afore head. Since the tribunal has awarded only an amount of ₹20,000/- under the afore head, there will be an additional amount of ₹36,000/- under the head loss of earnings.

Pain and suffering:- The learned counsel for the appellant submits that though an amount of ₹50,000/- was claimed, the tribunal awarded only ₹30,000/- towards pain and suffering, which is on the lower side. Considering the injuries sustained by the appellant, I am inclined to grant a total amount of ₹50,000/- to