Rajasthan High Court - Jaipur
Jitendra Singh @ Jai Singh vs Shri Islam And Anr. on 25 July, 1997
Equivalent citations: I(2000)ACC34
JUDGMENT D.C. Dalela, J.
1. Heard.
It is alleged that on 14.2.1992, Bus No. RRM-1083, driven negligently and rashly by its driver, hit the appellant-claimant, as a result of which, his leg was amputated. He preferred a claim-petition before the learned Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Jaipur City, Jaipur, which, after receiving the evidence and hearing both the sides, awarded a total compensation of Rs. 54,000/-. Feeling aggrieved by the amount of compensation, the appellant has preferred this appeal for its enhancement.
2. From the judgment and award of the learned Tribunal, it is evident that as a result of the accident, the left leg of the claimant-appellant was cut off and amputated and he sustained a permanent disablement of 55 per cent.
3. The learned Tribunal has awarded Rs. 4,000/- on account of pecuniary damages - the expenses which the appellant-claimant incurred on his treatment, medicines etc. A sum of Rs. 50,000/- has been awarded on account of non-pecuniary damages for the loss of amenities of life and mental agony, pain and suffering:
4. Hon'ble the Supreme Court, in the case of R.D. Hattangadi v. Pest Control (India) Pvt. Ltd. 1995 (1) TAC 557 (SC) : I (1995) ACC 281 (SC) has laid down as under:
Broadly speaking while fixing an amount of compensation payable to a victim of an accident, the damages have to be assessed separately as pecuniary damages and special damages. Pecuniary damages are those which the victim has actually incurred and which is capable of being calculated in terms of money; whereas, non-pecuniary damages are those which are incapable of being assessed by arithmetical calculations. In order to appreciate two concepts, pecuniary damages may include expenses incurred by the claimant - (i) medical attendance; (ii) loss of earning of profit upto the date of trial; and (iii) other material losses. So far as non-pecuniary damages are concerned, they may include, (i) damages for mental and physical shock, pain, suffering, already suffered or likely to be suffered in future; (ii) damages to compensate for the loss of amenities of life which may include a variety of matters, i.e., on account of injury the claimant may not be able to work, run or sit; (iii) damages for the loss of expectation of life, i.e., on account of injury the normal longevity of the person concerned, is shortened; and (iv) inconvenience, hardship, discomfort, disappointment, frustration and mental stress in life.
In this case, Hon'ble the Supreme Court has awarded non-pecuniary special damages of Rs. 3,00,000/-.
5. In the case of Gop Ramchandani v. Onkar Singh and Ors. this Court has awarded a compensation of Rs. 3,00,000/- on account of non-pecuniary special damages, when there was 50 per cent permanent disablement and there was amputation of one leg.
6. Here, in the present case in hand, one leg of the claimant-appellant, was cut off and amputated and there is 55 per cent permanent disablement. Therefore, on the analogy of the decision in the case of Gop Ramchandani, (supra), the claimant-appellant is entitled to a compensation of Rs. 3,00,000/- on account of non-pecuniary special damages.
7. So far as the pecuniary damages in connection with the medical treatment etc. are concerned, the learned Tribunal has awarded a sum of Rs. 4,000/-, which, in my opinion, is correct. Thus, a total compensation, which the claimant-appellant is entitled to, is Rs. 3,00,000/- plus Rs. 4,000/- = Rs. 3,04,000/-, in view of the principles laid down in Gop Ramchandani's, case (supra), by this Court; and in R.D Hattangadi's, case by Hon'ble the Supreme Court.
8. In the result, the appeal is partly allowed. The total compensation is enhanced to Rs. 3,04,000/-, from the total of Rs. 54,000/-, awarded by the learned Tribunal. To this extent, the award of the learned Tribunal shall stand modified. The other part, terms and conditions of the award, are maintained. The respondents are expected to make the payment of the compensation of Rs. 3,04,000/-, to the claimant-appellant, preferably within three months.