Lakshman Singh vs Tilak Bahadur & Anr.
2009 Latest Caselaw 5177 Del

35
*IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

                      +   MAC.APP.No.489/2004

                               Date of Decision: 14th December, 2009
%

      LAKSHMAN SINGH                   ..... Appellant
                   Through : Ms. Anupama Srivastava,
                             Adv.

                      versus

      TILAK BAHADUR & ANR.              ..... Respondents
                    Through : Mr. Avdhesh Singhal, Adv.
                              for R-2.

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

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

2.      To be referred to the Reporter or not?                 YES

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

                          JUDGMENT (Oral)

1. The appellant has challenged the award of the learned

Tribunal whereby compensation of Rs.1,60,000/- has been

awarded to the appellant. The appellant seeks enhancement

of the award amount.

2. The accident dated 21st May, 1997 resulted in grievous

injuries to the appellant. The appellant was riding on his

bicycle towards Gurudwara Shish Ganj when he was hit by

half body truck bearing No.DBL-3131. The appellant fell

down from the bicycle and was crushed under the wheels of

the truck.

3. The appellant has suffered 40% permanent disability.

The appellant suffered various injuries namely fracture of

ribs, pelvis, humorous, abdominal injuries, CLW, abrasions

etc. The right arm of the appellant got paralyzed and all the

fingers of the right hand have become immobile due to which

the appellant is not able to move or work with the right hand

at all. The appellant remained admitted for different periods

in LNJP Hospital, St. Stephens's Hospital, Tarachand Memorial

Hospital and Sant Parmanand Hospital. The appellant

suffered permanent disability to the extent of 40% of his

right upper limb as per disability certificate - Ex.PW8/1. The

testimony of the appellant with regard to the admission and

treatment in the abovesaid hospitals was corroborated by

PW-2 to PW-6, the officials of the above hospitals who proved

the record of admission and treatment as stated above.

From the statement of the appellant and PW-2, official of

LNJP Hospital and also record Ex.PW2/2, it is proved that the

appellant was admitted in the hospital on 21st May, 1997.

Emergency surgery was performed after conducting CT Scan

and other required investigations. The appellant was

discharged from the hospital on 5th June, 1997. The appellant

was admitted in St. Stephens's hospital on 5th August, 1997

and the medical record of admission and treatment has been

proved collectively as Ex.PW3/1. After the required

investigations, the appellant was operated for surgery. The

appellant was discharged on 7th August, 1997. Thereafter,

the appellant was admitted in Dr. Tarachand Memorial

Hospital from 25th September, 1997 to 4th October, 1997 and

again from 20th October, 1997 to 22nd October, 1997. The

medical record of admission and treatment in the hospital

has been proved by PW-4 as Ex.PW-4/1 to PW4/7.

Thereafter, the appellant was admitted in Sant Parmanand

Hospital from 27th January, 1998 till 3rd February, 1998 and

again from 5th June, 1998 to 7th June, 1998 and from 30th

March, 2001 to 31st March, 2001. The record of admission

and treatment in this hospital has been proved as Ex.PW5/1,

PW6/1 and PW6/2. The appellant remained admitted in

different hospitals for about 75 days and had to undergo

various surgeries and the permanent disability of the

appellant has been assessed as 40% in respect of the right

upper limb. The appellant has also proved the bills of

purchase of medicines and of payments to the hospitals and

for different investigations.

4. The appellant is present in the Court and his injuries

have been perused.

5. The learned Tribunal has taken the income of the

appellant according to the minimum wages at Rs.2,000/- per

month. The loss of income has been taken to be Rs.800/- per

month taking the functional disability of 40% and the

multiplier of 10 has been applied to compute the loss of

dependency at Rs.96,000/-. Rs.20,000/- has been awarded

towards loss on account of pain and suffering, Rs.5,000/- has

been awarded for conveyance, Rs.5,000/- has been awarded

towards special diet and Rs.34,000/- has been awarded

towards expenditure on medicine.

6. The learned counsel for the appellant has urged the

following grounds at the time of hearing of this appeal:-

(i) The loss of earning capacity of the appellant be

taken to be 100% for computing loss of income.

(ii) The multiplier be enhanced from 10 to 13.

(iii) The increase in minimum wages due to inflation

and rise in price index be taken into

consideration.

(iv) The compensation for pain and suffering be

enhanced.

(v) The compensation for loss of amenities of life and

disfiguration be awarded.

(vi) The compensation for conveyance and special

diet be enhanced.

(vii) The rate of interest be enhanced.

7. With respect to the loss of income, the appellant's right

hand got paralyzed and is immobile and, therefore, he is

unable to do any work whatsoever with his right hand. The

loss of earning capacity is, therefore, taken to be 100%.

8. The learned Tribunal has taken the minimum wages of

Rs.2,000/- per month. It is settled by the catena of

judgments of this Court in the cases of Kanwar Devi vs.

Bansal Roadways, 2008 ACJ 2182, National Insurance

Company Limited vs. Renu Devi III (2008) ACC 134 and

UPSRTC vs. Munni Devi, MAC.APP.No.310/2007 decided

on 28.07.2008 that the Court should take judicial notice of

increase in minimum wages to meet the increase in price

index and inflation rate. The Court has taken the view that

the minimum wages get doubled over the period of 10 years

and increase in minimum wages is not akin to future

prospects and the income should be computed by taking the

average of minimum wages and its double.

9. Following the aforesaid judgment, the income of the

appellant is taken to be Rs.3,000/- per month [(Rs.2,000 +

Rs.4,000/-)/2].

10. The appellant was aged 46 years at the time of the

accident and the appropriate multiplier is 13. Taking income

of the appellant to be Rs.3,000/- per month and applying the

multiplier of 13, the loss of income is computed to be

Rs.4,68,000/- (Rs.3,000 x 12 x 13).

11. The learned Tribunal has awarded Rs.20,000/- towards

pain and suffering and no compensation has been awarded

for loss of amenities of life and disfiguration. In the facts and

circumstances of this case, the compensation for pain and

suffering is enhanced from Rs.20,000/- to Rs.40,000/-.

Rs.40,000/- is awarded for loss of amenities of life and

Rs.40,000/- is awarded for disfiguration.

12. The learned Tribunal has awarded Rs.5,000/- for

conveyance and Rs.5,000/- for special diet. Considering that

the appellant is unable to travel by public transport as his

right hand has become immobile and he cannot hold

anything with his right hand and also that he remained under

treatment for a sufficiently long period and underwent

surgeries, the compensation for conveyance is enhanced

from Rs.5,000/- to Rs.20,000/-. The compensation towards

special diet is enhanced from Rs.5,000/- to Rs.10,000/-.

13. The appellants are entitled to total compensation of

Rs.6,52,000/- (Rs.4,68,000 + Rs.40,000 + Rs.40,000 +

Rs.40,000 + Rs.20,000 + Rs.10,000 + Rs.34,000).

14. The learned Tribunal has awarded interest @6% per

annum. Following the judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme

Court in the case of Dharampal vs. U.P. State Road

Transport Corporation, III 2008 ACC (1) SC, the rate of

interest is enhanced from 6% per annum to 7.5% per annum.

15. The appeal is allowed and the award amount is

enhanced from Rs.1,60,000/- to Rs.6,52,000/- along with

interest @7.5% per annum from the date of filing of the

petition till realization.

16. The enhanced award amount along with interest be

deposited by respondent No.2 with UCO Bank, Delhi High

Court Branch A/c Laxman Singh by means of a cheque

through Mr. M.M. Tandon, Member-Retail Team, UCO Bank

Zonal, Parliament Street, New Delhi (Mobile No.

09310356400) within 60 days.

17. Upon the aforesaid deposit being made, UCO Bank is

directed to release 10% of the same to the appellant and the

remaining amount be kept in fixed deposit in the name of the

appellant in the following manner:-

(i) Fixed deposit in respect of 10% of the amount for

a period of one year.

(ii) Fixed deposit in respect of 10% of the amount for

a period of two years.

(iii) Fixed deposit in respect of 10% of the amount for

a period of three years.

(iv) Fixed deposit in respect of 10% of the amount for

a period of four years.

(v) Fixed deposit in respect of 10% of the amount for

a period of five years.

(vi) Fixed deposit in respect of 10% of the amount for

a period of six years.

(vii) Fixed deposit in respect of 10% of the amount for

a period of seven years.

(viii) Fixed deposit in respect of 10% of the amount for

a period of eight years.

(ix) Fixed deposit in respect of 10% of the amount for

a period of nine years.

18. The interest on the aforesaid fixed deposits shall be

paid monthly by automatic credit of interest in the Savings

Account of the appellant.

19. Withdrawal from the aforesaid account shall be

permitted to the appellant after due verification and the

Bank shall issue photo Identity Card to the appellant to

facilitate identity.

20. The original Fixed Deposit Receipts shall be retained by

the Bank in the safe custody.

21. The original Pass Book shall be given to the appellant

along with the photocopy of the FDR.

22. The original Fixed Deposit Receipts shall be handed

over to the appellant at the expiry of FDR period.

23. No loan, advance or withdrawal shall be allowed on the

said Fixed Deposits without the permission of this Court.

24. Half yearly statement of account be filed by the Bank in

this Court.

25. On the request of the appellant, the Bank shall transfer

the Savings Account to any other branch of UCO Bank

according to the convenience of the appellant.

26. The appellant shall furnish all the relevant documents

for opening of the Saving Bank Account and Fixed Deposit

Account to Mr. M.M. Tandon, Member-Retail Team, UCO Bank

Zonal, Parliament Street, New Delhi.

27. It is noted that the offending vehicle was uninsured at

the time of the accident and the appellant is liable to the

prosecuted under Section 196 of the Motor Vehicles Act.

28. The notice be issued to Investigating Officer of FIR

No.553/97 dated 21st May, 1997 PS Kotwali to explain as to

why the appellant was not prosecuted under Section 196 of

the Motor Vehicles Act.

29. The Investigating Officer is directed to remain present

in the Court on the next date of hearing along with the police

file.

30. List on 3rd March, 2010.

31. Dasti.

J.R. MIDHA, J

DECEMBER 14, 2009 aj