Document Fragment View

Matching Fragments

-

1. Petitioner who is aged about 5 years who filed the present claim petition through his father Sh. Rajesh Jindal claimed a compensation of Rs. 13,51,262/- alongwith interest @ 18% on the ground that on 18.09.2010 at about 4.00 p.m. in front of Park of Sector-7, Rohini, Delhi he, who is already handicap, i.e. deaf from both ears, got injured when he was coming back to home from park with his father at about 4.00 p.m. and when they were waiting at the gate of the park for crossing the road then a motorcycle bearing registration no. DL-8SAK-6696 make Bajaj Pulser hit the petitioner. Further stated that vehicle was rashly negligently driven by R-1 who was driving the vehicle on very high speed, carelessly without obeying the traffic rules, without blowing horn and without having control over the brakes of the vehicles in question. Further stated that the vehicle directly hit and run over the petitioner from the right side, as a result the petitioner (Parth) fell down and kept on dragging with the running vehicle for a long distance from place of accident and that had the respondent no. 1 stopped the vehicle and not tried to run away after hitting the innocent petitioner, the petitioner would never had got such serious nature of injuries after felling down on the road, the petitioner who being deaf/handicap was wearing a very costly "cochlear" implant (hearing aid/machine) which got lost in the accident. The accident was seen by the father of the petitioner, while holding the finger of the petitioner. Thereafter master Parth Jindal was immediately brought to Jaipur Golden Hospital, Rohini, Delhi but there was heavy rush father of the petitioner took him to Max Hospital as he was under lot of pain and his various body parts were bleeding regularly. Further stated that the petitioner got special and immediate medical treatment in the said hospital as he was injured with several injuries at his head, face, ears, left leg, elbow, shoulder teeth and jaw and thereafter MLC No. 1694 was prepared by the hospital. Thereafter also petitioner ( Master Parth Jindal) was taken to hospital for further treatment. A criminal case under section 279/337 IPC was registered against respondent no.1 vide FIR No. 240/10 in police station Narela.

2. Father of the injured Master Parth Jindal alleged that prior to accident of his son he was earning more than Rs. 33,437/- per month and after the accident of his son he lost his work and became almost unemployed. Further alleged that due to loss of earning machine of injured and wounds of accident he became unable to understand anything properly and he is in urgent need of cochlear implant because he is deaf from both the ears and cannot listen without his cochlear implant and cost of one cochlear implant is Rs. 9,48,000/- and has incurred losses of Rs. 13,51,262/-. He claimed sum of Rs. 13,51,262/- alongwith interest as compensation from the respondents being driver-cum-owner and insurance company under various pecuniary and non pecuniary heads.

2. Whether the petitioner is entitled to compensation, if so, to what an extent and from which of the respondents? OPP
3. Relief

5. Petitioner in support of his claim examined his father Sh. Rajesh Jindal as PW1 and relied upon certain documents, i.e. permanent disability certificate Ex.PW1/1, copy of FIR Ex.PW1/2, MLC report Ex.PW1/3, copy of cochlear implant machine bill Ex.PW1/4, habilitation and mapping bill Ex.PW1/5, impedance charges Ex.PW1/6, medical bills (colly) Ex.PW1/7 to Ex.PW1/15, bills of other expenses Ex.PW1/16 and certificate from the mediclaim insurance company regarding receipt of Rs. 8159/- as Mark-X. Apart from that he stated that petitioner was confined to be and in future he will be not able to walk without any aid thus this accident has made him permanent disable. Though respondents did not examine any witness in support of their defence.

Medical expenses

10. The petitioner has stated that he has lost a very costly instrument i.e. cochlear implant the cost of which was Rs. 9,48,000/- and also filed bills in support of his plea. Apart from that PW1 stated that he incurred loses total amounting Rs. 13,51,262/-. Further PW1 stated that he is unable to run his business/profession properly like previously and has also under a huge debt due to spending a huge amount over treatment of his son. In support of his plea petitioner examined PW2 Dr. Vipin Kakar who inserted the first cochlear implant to injured. As such he is granted a sum of Rs. 13,51,262/- against medical expenses. However, it is the plea taken by PW1 in his affidavit that his son lost the cochlear implant cost of which was Rs. 9,48,000/- in the said accident but also admitted in his cross- examination that he has not mentioned the cost of cochlear implant in his statement made to the police or the FIR. Further admitted that they have not filed original receipts on record regarding mode of payment. As such amount of Rs. 9.48,000/- spent on the cochlear implant lost by injured at the time of his accident is not granted to the petitioner.