The court emphasized proper assessment of income and disability in compensation claims under motor vehicle accidents.

JUDGMENT

This appeal has been filed by the claimant in OP(MV) No.476 of

2013 on the files of the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Pala, claiming enhancement of compensation. The respondent herein was the fourth respondent before the tribunal.

2. The case of the claimant was that on 16.06.2013, while he was walking along a public road, a motorcycle bearing Reg.No.KL-6- A-8273, ridden 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 ₹10,00,000/-.

3. Respondents 1 to 3, who are the rider, insured and the registered owner of the offending vehicle respectively, remained ex parte before the tribunal. The fourth 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 A10, B1 & X1 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 rider of the offending vehicle and awarded a sum of ₹2,61,819/- as compensation under different heads with interest @ 7% per annum from the date of petition till realization, against the fourth 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. Notional income - The learned counsel for the appellant submits that the appellant was an agriculturist and was earning ₹10,000/- per month, however, the tribunal has fixed the monthly income notionally only at ₹5,000/-. The learned counsel for the appellant further submits that even going by the judgment in Ramachandrappa v. Manager, Royal Sundaram Alliance Insurance Company Ltd. [(2011) 13 SCC 236] , for an accident that occurred in 2013, the monthly income of a coolie is fixed at ₹9,000/- and seeks for an enhancement of the income fixed. Accordingly, following the judgment in Ramachandrappa (supra), I deem it appropriate to refix the monthly income of the appellant at ₹9,000/-.

5.2. Loss of earnings - The learned counsel for the appellant submits that the appellant was an agriculturist by profession and due to the injuries sustained in the accident, he could not work for almost six months, however, the tribunal has taken only a period of three months for awarding compensation towards loss of earnings. The appellant sustained a deep lacerated wound right eyebrow, fracture of right temporal and frontal bones, subdural and arachnoid hemorrhage and severe brain injury. Considering the nature of injuries sustained and the avocation of the appellant, I am of the opinion that five months can be taken for awarding compensation for loss of earnings. Accordingly, the appellant will be entitled to get a total compensation of ₹45,000/- (9000 x 5) under this head. Thus, there will be an additional compensation of ₹30,000/- towards loss of earnings.

5.3. Loss of amenities - Though the appellant claimed an amount of ₹50,000/- under this head, the tribunal awarded only an amount of ₹13,000/-, which, according to the appellant, is on the lower side. Considering the injuries sustained by the appellant and the loss of enjoyment in life, I deem it appropriate to award a total compensation of ₹40,000/- towards loss of amenities. Thus, the appellant will be entitled to get an additional amount of ₹27,000/- towards loss of amenities.

5.4. Permanent disability/Loss of earning power - The learned counsel for the appellant submits that as per Ext.X1 disab