The court can enhance compensation in motor accident claims when assessments are deemed inadequate or unreasonable.

JUDGMENT

Dated this the 30^th day of January, 2026 The petitioner in O.P.(M.V.) No.1101 of 2017 on the file of the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Perumbavoor has preferred this appeal seeking enhancement of compensation awarded by the Tribunal on account of the injuries sustained by him in a motor accident that occurred on 19.06.2017.

2. The case of the petitioner in brief is as follows:-

On 19.06.2017 at about 10:50 a.m., while the petitioner was crossing the Aluva-Angamaly NH Road near Desom and reached near the Central Median, a motor cycle bearing Registration No.KL-7/CJ-Temp-1331, ridden by the 1^st respondent from north to south direction, in a rash and negligent manner, hit down the petitioner and due to the impact of hit, the petitioner sustained severe injuries.

3. The owner cum rider of the motor cycle was arrayed as 1^st respondent whereas the insurer was arrayed as the 2^nd respondent. The 1^st respondent was remained ex parte. The 2^nd respondent entered appearance and filed written statement mainly disputing the quantum of compensation claimed despite admitting insurance coverage of the vehicle involved in the accident.

4. During trial, the documents produced from the side of the petitioner were marked as Exhibits A1 to A9. No evidence was produced from the side of the respondents.

5. After trial, the Tribunal came to the conclusion that the accident occurred solely due to the rash and negligent riding of the motor cycle by the 1^st respondent, and being the insurer, the 2^nd respondent was held liable to pay the compensation. The compensation was quantified at Rs.7,79,321/- with interest at the rate of 8% per annum from the date of petition till realisation with proportionate costs. Seeking enhancement of the said compensation awarded, the petitioner has come up with this appeal.

6. Heard learned counsel for both sides.

7. The learned counsel for the appellant would submit that the compensation awarded by the Tribunal under various heads is too meager and is not sufficient to compensate the actual loss and damages incurred by the petitioner due to the accident. According to the learned counsel, the Tribunal erred in assessing the income of the petitioner reasonably and consequently awarded only a meager amount as compensation under the head of permanent disability. The learned counsel further pointed out that the compensation awarded by the Tribunal under the head of pain and sufferings as well as under the head of loss of amenities and enjoyment of life are also on a lower side and therefore interference is highly warranted. Per contra, the learned standing counsel for the respondent insurance company would submit that the compensation awarded by the Tribunal under various heads is reasonable and adequate and therefore no interference is warranted.

8. From the rival contentions raised, it is gatherable that the main dispute that revolves around this appeal is with respect to the quantum of compensation awarded by the Tribunal. A perusal of the impugned award reveals that for the purpose of determining compensation under the head permanent disability and loss of earnings the Tribunal assessed the monthly income of the petitioner at Rs.9,000/-. In the petition, it was contended that the petitioner was an agriculturist at the time of accident and was earning a monthly income of Rs.12,000/-. However, apart from raising such a contention in the petition, no evidence whatsoever was produced from the petitioner's side to substantiate his claim regarding his