Indian Kanoon - Search engine for Indian Law

6. Counsel for the insurance company submitted that the words "privation of member" are confined to Section 142 of the Act, i.e., for interim compensation, but while determining final compensation, Court has to record its finding from the evidence on record. If the claimant has proved permanent disability in the evidence or the percentage of permanent partial disability, then the claimant is entitled for compensation on account of permanent or partial disability. Counsel for the insurance company submitted that the later judgment in the case of Mool Chand (supra) is the correct judgment, whereas earlier judgment in the case of Saurabh Kumar Shukla (supra) is limited to Section 142 of the Act.

7. Counsel for the claimant contended that when the nature of disablement is proved by the medical report as well as by evidence of doctor, Claims Tribunal has no option but to accept the deposition of the medical expert regarding percentage of disability. Counsel for the insurance company submitted that any bald statement of the doctor about the percentage of loss of disability without performing scientific tests as to disability suffered by the injured is inadmissible in evidence. Until and unless nature of injury is proved and the disability is determined after performing scientific tests oral evidence of the expert is not reliable.

8. Counsel for the claimant further submitted that for the purposes of Section 163A of the Act, Schedule for compensation has been prepared. Para 5 of the Schedule relates to disability in non-fatal accidents. He submitted that on perusal of Para 5, it is clear that in case of injuries nature of injuries are of two types, i.e., grievous injuries and non-grievous injuries. Thereafter, disability due to grievous injuries is required to be determined. Disability is of two types : permanent total disablement and permanent partial disablement; and for temporary disablement compensation can be awarded for loss of income for period not exceeding 52 weeks. He submitted that after grievous injury disability is of three kinds viz., (i) temporary disablement which may extend to fifty two weeks; (ii) permanent disablement; and (iii) permanent partial disablement. Para 5 further provides that injuries deemed to result in permanent total disablement/permanent partial disablement and percentage of loss of earning capacity shall be as per Schedule I under Workmen's Compensation Act. He submitted that percentage of disablement shall not be more than Schedule I of the Workmen's Compensation Act. Counsel for the insurance company has taken the Court through various provisions of Workmen's Compensation Act and submitted that percentage of disablement should be determined on the basis of Schedule I of the Workmen's Compensation Act and the Court should not accept bald statement of the doctor regarding permanent/partial disablement. Counsel for the insurance company submitted that in the absence of clear directions, doctors appear in Court and depose about the percentage of disability and issue certificates without performing any tests or assigning any reason for determining the percentage of loss to the body after the injury. Such evidence should not be accepted and the Court should rely upon Schedule of the Workmen's Compensation Act to determine the percentage of partial disability or permanent disability.