Punjab-Haryana High Court
Rajbeer vs Jaswant Singh And Ors on 20 August, 2013
F.A. O. No. 3220 of 2011
-1-
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA,
CHANDIGARH
F.A.O. No. 3220 of 2011
Date of decision:-20.08.2013
Rajbeer ....... Appellant
Versus
Jaswant Singh and ors. ........ Respondents
CORAM:HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIJENDER SINGH MALIK
Present: Mr.Ram Pal Verma, Advocate
for the appellant.
Mr. M.B.Jain, Advocate
for respondent no.3.
****
Vijender Singh Malik, J.
This is an appeal brought by the claimant for enhancement of compensation. Rajbeer, the claimant had brought a claim petition under section 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 (for short 'the Act') seeking compensation in a sum of `20,00,000/- for the injuries he suffered in a road side accident that took place on 11.12.2006. Learned Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Gurgaon (for short 'the Tribunal) vide award dated 15.03.2011 allowed the claim petition in a sum of `6,30,000/-.
Rajbeer, the claimant suffered multiple injuries, which included fracture on the head and other parts of the body. He also claimed that his front teeth came out of the socket. According to him, he became unconscious on account of the injuries and on becoming conscious, he Kumar Dinesh 2013.08.27 10:53 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document High Court,Chandigarh F.A. O. No. 3220 of 2011 -2- came to know that Dr.Rajesh Yadav got him admitted at Ayushman Hospital Hero Honda Crossing, Gurgaon. He has claimed that he remained in ICU for about 20 days. He was even advised to rest after discharge from the hospital. He has got his face disfigured and has got his brain damaged. He had spent a sum of Rs.5,00,000/- in his treatment, Rs.1,00,000/- in special diet, conveyance and attendant and he has to engage attendant to help him in his day to day life, which he has engaged at Rs.2,000/- per month. He has also claimed that he by doing agricultural work and dairy farming work used to earn Rs.10,000/- per month.
The aforesaid averments have been denied by the respondents. They have denied the injuries allegedly suffered by the claimant and his expenses incurred in his treatment. They have denied the claimant to deserve a sum of Rs.20,00,000/- as compensation.
Learned Tribunal noticed from the statement of Dr. Vinit Bhai, PW-5 that the claimant suffered permanent disability to the tune of 52%. His disability certificate came on the record as Ex.PW-5/A. The doctor had said that the patient will have to take medicines for seizures (fits) for a long time. Learned Tribunal assessed a sum of Rs.1500/- per month as the loss of earning capacity of the claimant, on account of the disability. Keeping in view the age of the claimant, assessed at 34 years, the multiplier of 15 was adopted and a sum of Rs.2,70,000/- was assessed as compensation for loss of earning capacity due to permanent disability. Assessing compensation under other heads, a sum of Rs.6,30,000/- has been awarded as compensation. Kumar Dinesh 2013.08.27 10:53 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document High Court,Chandigarh F.A. O. No. 3220 of 2011 -3-
Learned counsel for the appellant has contended that the appellant had suffered head injury. According to him, as stated by Dr. Vinit Bhai, PW-5 the claimant-appellant was found suffering from head injury with post traumatic seizures. According to him, he was having 8 to 10 episodes of seizures per month after medication. According to him, he also found the claimant to have suffered a asymmetry of face with scar on face Alae of nose with depression of right upper lip. According to him, there was no justification for the Tribunal to have taken Rs.1500/- per month as the loss of future income of the claimant. He has further submitted that future medication is necessary as per the statement of the doctor in the case of the appellant and no amount has been awarded in the name of expenses on future medication to the claimant. He has further submitted that on account of the aforesaid disability, the claimant would have lost much on future enjoyment of life also. He has also submitted that the compensation assessed by the Tribunal does not take care of these facts and, therefore, the same is liable to be enhanced.
Learned counsel for respondent No.3, on the other hand, has submitted that the amount assessed for permanent disability is more than adequate. According to him, the compensation assessed on other counts is also more than adequate. He has further submitted that the claimant -appellant is , therefore not entitled to any enhancement in the compensation.
A sum of Rs.10,000/- has been assessed by the Tribunal for pain and suffering. The claimant suffered the accident on 11.12.2006 Kumar Dinesh 2013.08.27 10:53 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document High Court,Chandigarh F.A. O. No. 3220 of 2011 -4- and he remained in ICU for about 20 days. He had suffered severe injury on the head, the after effects of which are also quite severe. Learned Tribunal seems to have been frugal in awarding the amount in the name of pain and suffering. I assess a sum of Rs.40,000/- in this regard.
It is a case where the appellant suffered head injury and other serious injuries. A sum of Rs.3,31,212/- is proved on the record as expenses incurred in the treatment. Learned Tribunal ignored the aspect of spending of some amount in such cases without obtaining bills. Therefore, I take the amount spent in the treatment as Rs.3,50,000/-.
It is a case where the disability would definitely affect the earning capacity in an equal amount. The disability is to the extent of 52%. Learned Tribunal took the income of the appellant at Rs.3000/- per month and assessed the loss of earning capacity as Rs.1500/- per month. First of all the amount of Rs.3000/- is assessed at a lower side. It cannot be taken below Rs.3500/- per month and 52% thereof would come to Rs.1820/-. The victim had been of the age of 34 years and the multiplier of 16 is suitable in this case. Multiplying the amount of Rs.1820/-, as loss of earning capacity with 12 to assess the annual loss and with 16 , the multiplier, I find a sum of Rs.3,49,440/- rounded off to Rs.3,50,000/- as the amount lost by the claimant from his future income.
It is a case where the appellant is still suffering from seizures. At the time of those seizures, which are repeated 8 to 10 times in a month he would require services of attendant. Learned Tribunal has awarded a sum of `6000/- for attendant charges for two months, which Kumar Dinesh 2013.08.27 10:53 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document High Court,Chandigarh F.A. O. No. 3220 of 2011 -5- is not adequate. A sum of `1,00,000/- is required as compensation payable to the claimant for attendant charges.
In the name of transportation and miscellaneous expenses, a sum of `2788/- has been awarded by the Tribunal. In my opinion, this is again an example of frugality on the part of the Tribunal. It should be enhanced to `20,000/-.
Now I am left with the only aspect of loss of enjoyment of life. The person, who has suffered asymmetry of face and other scars would even feel deprived throughout the life whenever he would see the mirror. The disability is of 52% in this case and this is a functional disability. In this situation, a sum of `1,00,000/- has to be awarded as compensation for loss of future enjoyment of life. Therefore, I find the appellant to be entitled to `9,60,000/- as compensation for the injuries and the resulting permanent disability suffered by him.
In the result, the appeal succeeds and is allowed enhancing the compensation from `6,30,000/- to `9,60,000/- which shall be payable to the claimant by the respondents with interest and in the manner as allowed by the Tribunal in his award.
(VIJENDER SINGH MALIK) JUDGE 20.08.2013 dinesh Kumar Dinesh 2013.08.27 10:53 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document High Court,Chandigarh