Naresh Kumar Beri vs Bharat Singh And Ors.
2003 Latest Caselaw 1277 Del

JUDGMENT

S.K. Mahajan, J.

1. ADMIT.

2. Since the point involved in this case was short, the matter has been heard with the consent of the parties and disposed of by this order.

3. This appeal is directed against the judgment of the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal whereby the Tribunal has awarded a sum of Rs. 1,10,250/- with interest @ 9% p.a. in favor of the appellant as compensation for the injuries sustained by him in a road accident caused by the rash and negligent driving of the offending vehicle owned by respondent No.1 and insured with respondent No. 3. The appellant in this appeal claimed enhancement of compensation on the ground that the Tribunal has failed to take into consideration the disability suffered by the appellant and the mental pain, shock and agony which he had to suffer for almost two years when he was confined to bed and would continue to suffer throughout his life. A few facts relevant for deciding the appeal are :-

In a road accident caused by the rash and negligent driving of the offending vehicle, the appellant was injured and was taken to the hospital; that he remained unconscious for about a week and was put under traction of almost about 10 Kgs. of weight for about fifteen days during which period he is alleged to have suffered consistent pain, agony, restlessness and was unable to sleep. It was further stated that the appellant suffered multiple fractures and in the surgery performed on him, steel plate of about 6" with 12 holes was inserted in the right leg with 13 screws to fix it to the bone; a part of the pelvis bone was cut in order to be grafted in the affected bone and the rod inserted in his leg still exist as a result of which not only that his leg has been shortened by 1-1/4"but he is under constant pain and had to limp throughout his life because of the shortening of leg. The appellant, therefore, filed an application claiming compensation before the Tribunal for the injuries sustained by him in the said accident. The Tribunal by the impugned order awarded a sum of Rs. 40,250/- the loss of leg, a sum of Rs. 30,000/- as the amount spent on conveyance and fare; a sum of Rs. 10,000/- towards special diet and a sum of Rs. 30,000/- as compensation for physical and mental agony and pain. A total compensation of Rs. 1,10,250/- was thus awarded in favor of the appellant along with interest @ 9% p.a. 90% of the awarded amount with up-to-date interest was directed to be deposited in an FDR for a period of 10 years with a provision that the appellant would be entitled to draw quarterly interest but will not be granted any loan. As already mentioned above, aggrieved by this judgment, the appellant has filed the present appeal.

4. The only ground urged by learned counsel for the appellant for enhancement is that the appellant was confined to bed for more than a year and during this period he had to suffer enormous mental pain, shock and agony and as the rod and the plate are still inserted inside his leg, he has to continue to suffer the pain throughout his life and the Tribunal has, therefore, completely erred in awarding a meagre sum of Rs. 30,000/- towards mental pain, shock and agony. Another ground on which the appellant is seeking enhancement of compensation is that the leg of the appellant having admittedly been shortened by about 1-1/4" as is duly proved by the medical certificates, the appellant had to limp throughout his life and the Tribunal has not awarded any amount for such disability suffered by him.

5. I find merits in the arguments advanced by learned counsel for the appellant. The medical certificate Ex.PW-1/1 placed on record by the appellant clearly shows that his leg has been shortened by approximately 1-1/4". It also shows that a 4 hole plate was fixed in his leg and a special pin of 3-1/4" was also inserted. The appellant had been advised to undergo constant physiotherapy for the disability suffered by him by shortening of leg and insertion of plate and rod. The fact that the appellant's leg has been shortened by 1-1/4" clearly show that he may have to limp throughout his life and has thus suffered a permanent disability. Though the extent of disability is not mentioned in the certificate, however, the fact that the leg itself has been shortened by 1-1/4" shows that the appellant had suffered permanent disability which he will have to suffer throughout his life. This disability may not have caused any hindrance in the appellant getting employment as a pilot but that cannot be a ground not to award compensation for the disability suffered by the appellant.

6. In a case reported as Shashendra Lahiri v. UNICEF and Ors., 1998 ACJ 859, the Supreme Court for shortening of leg of a 17 year student by 3" had directed compensation of Rs.4,58,000/- to be paid for the permanent disability suffered by him. Since the leg of the appellant in this case has been shortened by 1-1/4", in my opinion, the ends of justice will be met by awarding a sum of Rs.1,00,000/- by way of compensation for the permanent disability suffered by him by such shortening of leg. Coming next to the compensation for the mental pain, shock and agony suffered by the appellant, it is not in dispute that the appellant was confined to bed for more than a year and he was in coma for a period of 15 days. His leg was also under traction with heavy weight for quite some time. A steel rod and plate have been inserted in his leg which will remain there throughout his life. He has been advised physiotherapy throughout his life so as to remain fit. One can imagine the mental pain, shock and agony which the appellant must have suffered during all this period when he remained in bed and which he will continue to suffer throughout his life. Taking all this into consideration, in my opinion, the amount of Rs. 30,000/- awarded by the Tribunal under the head of mental pain, shock and agony is too meagre an amount to compensate the appellant for the same. I, accordingly, enhance the compensation under this head also from Rs. 30,000/- to Rs. 1,00,000/-.

7. For the foregoing reasons, I partly allow this appeal, modify the award and direct that the appellant will be entitled to a total compensation of Rs. 2,80,250/- from respondents 2 and 3 jointly and severally. The appellant will also be entitled to interest on the enhanced compensation @ 8% p.a. from the date of filing the application before the Tribunal till payment. In the facts of this case, however, the parties are left to bear their own costs.