WILSON S/O.ANTHONY Vs. ALIAS K. VARGHESE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE appellant, who is the petitioner in O.P.(MV) No.12/2005 of the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Irinjalakuda, was a pillion rider of a motorbike, who suffered an accident on 17.04.2003. While the rider of the motorbike was cutting across the National Highway from west to east, the car driven by the 2nd respondent dashed against the motorbike, thereby causing injuries to the petitioner.

(2.) THE petitioner was 37 years old at the time of the accident and he claims to be a business man conducting a bakery and obtaining a monthly income of 4,000/ -. He suffered lacerated wound measuring around 5 x 1 x 5 cm over medial side of right ankle, small lacerated wound 1x 5 x 0.5 cm. antero -lateral aspect of right ankle, multiple abrasion over right leg, abdomen and Type II subluxation, as is evidenced by Ext.A3 wound certificate. He had spent an amount of 8,059.40 towards medical expenses as is evidenced by Ext.A5. He had undergone treatment as inpatient for 11 days. The Tribunal has arrived at an amount of 26,600/ - as compensation to be paid. Further, by finding contributory negligence on the part of the rider of the motorbike it has been ordered that 60% of the amount of compensation shall be paid by the 4th respondent who is the insurer of the car and 40% of the compensation shall be paid by respondents 5 and 6, who are the owner and rider of the motorbike. The appellant is challenging the inadequacy of the amount granted as compensation as well as the finding and consequent order regarding contributory negligence.

(3.) REGARDING the quantum of compensation, the learned counsel for the appellant has pointed out that an amount of 6000/ - only was granted as compensation towards loss of earnings for three months. Income of the petitioner was calculated at the rate of 2,000/ - per month. On appreciating the facts pointed out by the learned counsel for the appellant, an amount of 3,000/ - can be considered to be his monthly income and therefore, the Tribunal ought to have granted an amount of 9,000/ - towards compensation for loss of earnings. For pain and sufferings also an amount of 7,000/ - only was granted. An amount of 10,000/ - under the said head can be considered as just compensation for pain and sufferings, considering the fact that he had undergone treatment as inpatient for 11 days. On going through the other heads under which compensation has been granted by the Tribunal, it seems that no further interference is required. Over and above the amount granted by the Tribunal, an amount of 6,000/ - more has to be granted as additional compensation to the present appellant. There is no question of any contributory negligence and therefore, the entire amount of compensation has to be paid by the 4th respondent, insurer of the car. In the result, this M.A.C.A. is allowed and an amount of 6,000/ - more is granted as additional compensation, over and above the amount of compensation granted by the Tribunal. The whole amount of compensation, with interest at 7.5% per annum, from the date of petition shall be paid by the 4th respondent, within a period of two months from today.