Union Of India & Anr vs Dharamveer Singh & Others
2009 Latest Caselaw 1569 Del

29
*IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

                    +    MAC.APP.710/2006

                                 Date of Decision: 21st April, 2009
%

      UNION OF INDIA & ANR           ..... Appellants
                     Through : Mr. Ashwani Bhardwaj, Adv.

                    versus


      DHARAMVEER SINGH & OTHERS             ..... Respondents
                   Through : None


CORAM :-
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE J.R. MIDHA

1.      Whether Reporters of Local papers may
        be allowed to see the Judgment?

2.      To be referred to the Reporter or not?

3.      Whether the judgment should be
        reported in the Digest?

                        JUDGMENT (Oral)

1. The appellant has challenged the award of the learned

Tribunal whereby compensation of Rs.2,44,000/- has been

awarded to respondents No.1.

2. The accident dated 14th November, 1989 resulted in

permanent disability to the extent of 40% to respondent

no.1. Respondent no.1 is a constable who was on duty at the

time of the accident. He was sitting on the pillion of the

motor cycle which was hit by the Government car. The

claimant suffered fracture in the neck of right femur and was

hospitalized.

3. The claimant remained on leave for 3 years, 6 months

and 21 days. After adjusting available leave, Rs.47,895/- was

deducted from his salary and the claimant suffered loss of

Rs.16,064/- towards earned leave. The learned Tribunal

awarded Rs. 64,000/- towards loss of salary and loss of

earned leave on the basis of the evidence. Respondent No.1

claimed Rs.1 lakh towards expenses on treatment but the

medical bills were not produced on record. The learned

Tribunal, therefore, drew presumption under Section 114 of

the Evidence Act and awarded Rs. 20,000/- towards

expenditure on medicines, Rs. 15,000/- towards special diet

and Rs.15,000/- towards conveyance. Rs. 1 Lakh has been

awarded for the permanent disability and Rs.30,000/- for

pain and suffering. In total Rs. 2,44,000/- has been awarded

to the claimant.

4. The appellant has challenged the award on the ground

that the amount awarded by the learned Tribunal is

exorbitant and no amount should have been awarded for

expenditure on treatment since no bills were produced.

5. Respondent No.1 is a government employee working as

constable. Respondent No.1 was on duty when he was hit by

the car resulting in 40% disability and he remained on leave

for 3 years, 6 months and 21 days.

6. There is no merit in the appeal. The amount awarded

by the learned Tribunal is just, fair and reasonable and does

not warrant any interference in appeal. The learned Tribunal

has drawn fair presumptions of expenditure on medicines,

special diet and conveyance considering the 40% disability

suffered by the claimant/respondent.

7. The appeal is dismissed with costs.

J.R. MIDHA, J

APRIL 21, 2009 K