An appeal for enhanced compensation in a motorcycle accident case is considered, leading to a recalibration based on injury severity and income adjustments.

JUDGMENT

This appeal is filed by the claimant in O.P (MV) No.1229 of

2006 on the file of the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Thrissur, claiming enhancement of compensation. The respondents herein are the respondents before the tribunal.

2. According to the claimant, on 03.04.2006 at about 5.30 p.m., while the claimant was travelling as a pillion rider on a motorcycle, the motorcycle ridden by the 2nd respondent suddenly toppled. As a result of the accident, the appellant sustained serious injuries. The claimant approached the tribunal claiming compensation of ₹1,10,000/-.

3. The first respondent was the owner and second respondent was the rider of the offending motorcycle who remained ex parte before the tribunal. The 3^rd respondent, insurer of the offending vehicle, filed a written statement admitting the policy but disputing the quantum of compensation claimed. Before the tribunal, Exts.A1 to A8 were marked. The tribunal, after analysing the pleadings and materials on record, awarded a sum of ₹23,700/- with interest at 7.5% per annum as compensation under various heads against the 3^rd respondent/insurer of the offending motorcycle. 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/claimant and the learned standing counsel appearing 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 ₹5,000/- was claimed as the income of the claimant, the tribunal had taken ₹3,000/- as the income of the injured who was a barber by profession. The learned counsel further submitted 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 2006 is fixed as ₹5,500/- and sought for enhancement of income. Therefore, in order to award a just and reasonable compensation, following the judgment in Ramachandrappa (supra), I find it appropriate to fix the income at ₹5,500/-.

Loss of earnings :- On a perusal of the award, it is seen that the tribunal has awarded compensation for loss of earnings for a period of two months. The claimant had his left clavicle fractured due to the accident. Considering the nature of injuries sustained, I find that a period of four months can be taken for awarding compensation under the afore head. Since the monthly income has been re-fixed as ₹5,500/-, the compensation payable for loss of earnings for a period of four months is re-calculated as thus ₹22,000/- (5,500x4). The tribunal has awarded an amount of ₹6,000/- under the afore head. Thus, there will be an additional amount of ₹16,000/- towards loss of earnings.

Loss of amenities :- The learned counsel for the appellant submitted that though an amount of ₹10,000/- was claimed, the tribunal has awarded only an amount of ₹4,000/- under the head loss of amenities. Considering the age of the appellant as well as the loss of enjoyment in life, I find that a total amount of ₹20,000/- can be granted towards loss of amenities. Thus, there will be an additional amount of ₹16,000/- under the afore head.

Pain and sufferings :- The learned counsel for the appellant submitted that though an amount of ₹20,000/- was claimed, The tribunal has awarded only an amount of ₹5,000/- under the head pain and sufferings. Considering the age of the appellant as well as the nature of injuries, I find that a total amount of ₹20,000/- can be granted towards pain and sufferings. Thus, there will be an additional amount of ₹15,000/- under the afore head.

Permanent disability/loss of earning po