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. Heard the learned counsel for the appellant and the learned counsel for the 4th respondent. The learned counsel for the appellant has invited the attention of this Court to the contents of the scene mahazar. The incident had occurred at a junction in N.H. 47. It is an admitted case that the rider of the motorbike was cutting across the highway from west to east and the car was proceeding from south to north. The tarred portion of the road at that spot has a width of 9 mtrs. It seems that the rider of the motorbike had crossed over the middle portion of the road, as the spot of the incident is 4.98 mtrs. away towards east from the western tar end. The eastern tar end is 4.02 mtrs. away from the spot of incident. Therefore, it is evident that the car had gone into the eastern half of the road without any reason. Thus, the 2nd respondent, who was the driver of the car, was negligent and thereby the incident had occurred. Matters being so, there is no meaning in attributing any contributory negligence on the part of the rider of the motorbike in the accident. Hence, the entire compensation has to be met by the 4th respondent, insurer of the car.
4. 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.
Sd/- B. KEMAL PASHA, JUDGE ul/-
[True copy] P.S. to Judge