Punjab-Haryana High Court
Arjun Singh Alias Surjan vs Bahadur Singh And Others on 30 June, 2014
Author: K. Kannan
Bench: K. Kannan
FAO No.3791 of 2002 (O&M) -1-
IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATES OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT
CHANDIGARH
FAO No.3791 of 2002 (O&M)
Date of Decision.30.06.2014
Arjun Singh alias Surjan ......Appellant
Versus
Bahadur Singh and others ......Respondents
Present: Mr. R.S. Budhwar, Advocate for the appellant.
Mr. D.R. Bansal, Advocate for the insurance company.
CORAM:HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE K. KANNAN
1. Whether Reporters of local papers may be allowed to see the judgment ?
2. To be referred to the Reporters or not ?
3. Whether the judgment should be reported in the Digest?
-.-
K. KANNAN J.
1. The appeal is for enhancement of compensation for injuries suffered in a motor accident that took place on 07.01.1999. The Tribunal assessed the compensation of ` 1,70,000/-. I find the quality of evidence adduced to be deficient. The extent of assistance is also not upto the mark since the original papers had been destroyed and the counsel for the appellant was called upon to help the Court to reconstruct the file with copies of documents on which he would place his reliance on. The appellant has not filed any document other than the copy of the award. The award does not detail even the nature of injuries. All that it states is that he was hospitalized for a period of two months and he had head injury. The doctor has assessed the disability at 60% and I have no means of knowing whether this injury is such that Kamboj Pankaj Kumar 2014.07.02 09:54 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document Chandigarh FAO No.3791 of 2002 (O&M) -2- it can impact his ability to work and earn. The Tribunal has adopted what was recently done by decisions of this Court of providing for compensation at the rate of ` 2,000/- for every percentage of disability. As inartistic and inappropriate as this mode of assessment could be, I am afraid I cannot make any favourble intervention for the appellant for assessing the loss of earning capacity for deficient evidence. The only benefit which I will accord to the appellant is to provide for relatively higher sum as compensation for pain and suffering. Since the injuries have been in head, he must have carried through his period of hospitalization with lost of pain and therefore, I assess the compensation at ` 25,000/- and tabulate the various heads as under:-
INJURY CASE Arjun Singh Age Period of Hospitalization more than two months Occupation Carpenter Heads of claim Tribunal High Court Sl. No. Amount Amount (Rs.) (Rs) 1 Loss of income 2 Medical expenses
(i) Medicines 30,000 30,000
(ii) Hospital Charges
(iii) Attendant Charges 5000 5000
(iv) Special Diet
(v) Transport 5000 5000 3 Pain & Suffering-per fracture/per 10,000 25,000 surgery 4 Disability 60% 60% 5 Loss of earning capacity income Multiplier % of loss of earning capacity
6. Loss of amenities 1,20,000 1,20,000 7 Reduction in life expectancy Kamboj Pankaj Kumar 2014.07.02 09:54 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document Chandigarh FAO No.3791 of 2002 (O&M) -3- INJURY CASE Arjun Singh 8 Loss of prospect of marriage Total 1,70,000 1,85,000
2. There shall be an award of ` 1,85,000/-. The additional amount of ` 15,000/- will also attract interest @7.5% from the date of petition till the date of payment. The liability shall be on the insurance company.
3. The award is modified and the appeal is allowed to the above extent.
(K. KANNAN) JUDGE June 30, 2014 Pankaj* Kamboj Pankaj Kumar 2014.07.02 09:54 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document Chandigarh