Document Fragment View

Matching Fragments

3. Tribunal has recorded a finding of negligence on the part of the bus driver in causing the accident and this finding has remained unrebutted. As far as nature of injuries are concerned, it has come on record that she lost vision in her right eye. Dr. P.K. Tiwari, gave his report Ex.A/3 and was examined as PW/6, where he informed that there was haemotoma on the left hand side of the injured, causing paralysis on the right hand side body of the claimant and there is also reduction in her right eye sight. Discharge certificate is Ex.A/4 and in cross-examination, this doctor admitted that the injuries sustained by the claimant were grievous in nature.

4. Dr. Shrikant Gatkari from Nagpur (PW/5) was also examined before the Tribunal and he admitted that there was reduction in hearing and verbal ability of the claimant so also decrease in comprehension. PW/7 Dr. Yogesh Gadekar, gave disability certificate Ex.A/5 and clearly mentioned that claimant suffered paralysis in right side of her body and there is 70% permanent disability caused to the claimant.

7. Instead of remitting the matter to the Tribunal and taking into consideration that long 21 years time has lapsed, this Court proposes to decide the appeal on its own merit looking to the established principles of law laid down by Hon'ble Supreme Court.

8. It is not in dispute that age of claimant at the time of the accident was 17 years. It is also not in dispute that date of accident is 15.10.1998. It is also not in dispute that claimant was a student and was going to attend her school. In view of such facts, claimant can be considered to be a skilled labourer and wages for a skilled labourer on the date of accident were to the tune of Rs.1855/- per month or Rs.22,260/- per annum. There is evidence on record that claimant sustained paralysis of right hand side body, resulting in 70% disability as is certified by Dr. Yogesh Gadhekar (PW/7). There is no challenge to the said certificate. Therefore, loss of income potential to earn will be 15,582/- per annum, over and above which 40% is to be added towards the future prospects. Multiplier of 18 will be applicable in the light of law laid down by Hon'ble Supreme Court in Smt. Sarla Verma and others Vs. Delhi Transport Corporation and another [(2009) 6 SCC 121]. Thus, claimant will be entitled to a sum of Rs.3,92,666/- (Rupees Three Lakhs, Ninety Two Thousand, Six Hundred Sixty Six) under the head of loss of income. In addition, she will be entitled to a sum of Rs.65,000/- (Rupees Sixty Five Thousand) as has been awarded by learned Claims Tribunal.