Court re-evaluated compensation based on loss of earnings, pain, and suffering, allowing an uplift of ₹1,94,980/-.

JUDGMENT

This appeal is filed by the claimant in OP(MV) No.537 of

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

2. According to the claimant, on 2.02.2006 at about 02.00 p.m., while the claimant was riding his motorcycle bearing registration No.KL-9K-514 from Kulappully to Pattambi, a bus bearing registration No.KL-9L/3159 driven by the first respondent in a rash and negligent manner hit against the motorcycle and as a result, claimant sustained serious injuries. The claimant approached the tribunal claiming a total compensation of ₹9,00,000/-.

3. The first and second respondents were the driver and the owner of the offending vehicle respectively. Though they entered appearance, no written statement was filed on their behalf. The third respondent - insurer filed a written statement, admitting the insurance policy, disputing the liability and quantum of compensation claimed. Before the tribunal, PW1 was examined, Exts.A1 to A16 and Ext.B1 were marked. The tribunal, after analysing the pleadings and materials on record, found that the accident occurred due to negligence on the part of the first respondent and the appellant/claimant was awarded a sum of ₹2,15,100/-, as compensation under different heads with interest @ 7% per annum from the date of petition till realization with proportionate costs against the third 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 appearing for the respondent insurer.

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

I. Notional Income The learned counsel for the appellant submitted that though an amount of ₹3,500/- was claimed as the monthly income of the appellant, who was a coolie, the tribunal had taken only ₹2,500/- which is on a lower side. 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 monthly income of a coolie is taken at ₹5,500/- for an accident in 2006 and sought enhancement of the income. Accordingly, following the judgment in Ramachandrappa (supra) and in order to award a just and reasonable compensation, I find it appropriate to re-fix the notional monthly income at ₹5,500/-.

II. Loss of earnings The learned counsel for the appellant submitted that though an amount of ₹35,000/- was claimed by the appellant towards loss of earnings, no amount was awarded by the tribunal. The appellant sustained the following injuries:

i) Fracture dislocation right hip ii) Partial amputation of right upper limp iii) Abrasion right forearm iv) Degloving injury right knee v) Fracture humerus right vi) 5 x 6 cm lacerated wound right face vii) Fracture right ulna viii) Laceration big toe Considering the nature of injuries sustained by the appellant, I find that a period of five months can be taken for awarding compensation under the head loss of earnings. Since the notional monthly income is re-fixed as ₹5,500/-, the total compensation payable under the said head would be re- calculated as ₹27,500/- (5,500 x 5). Thus the appellant will be entitled for an amount of ₹27,500/- under the head loss of earnings.

III. Pain and sufferings The learned counsel for the appellant submitted that though an amount of ₹20,000/- was claimed towards the head pain and sufferings, only an amount of ₹15,000/- was awarded by the tribunal. Considering the age and nature of injuries sustained by the appell