United India Insurance Co. Ltd. vs Sunil Kumar & Ors
2009 Latest Caselaw 5190 Del

40
*IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

                  +       MAC.APP.No.414/2008

                           Date of Decision: 14th December, 2009
%

      UNITED INDIA INSURANCE CO. LTD.          ..... Appellant
                     Through : Mr. L.K. Tyagi, Adv.

                      versus

      SUNIL KUMAR & ORS           ..... Respondents
                    Through : Mr. M. Awasthi, Adv. for R-1.


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.22,20,521/- has been

awarded to respondent No.1.

2. The accident dated 15th December, 2005 resulted in

grievous injuries to respondent No.1. Respondent No.1 was

driving car bearing No.DL-8C-F-4290 while coming from

Roorkee to Delhi. The car of respondent No.1 was hit by

truck bearing No.HR-38-3000 at Mansoorpur in District

Muzaffar Nagar. Respondent No.1 went into coma after the

accident. Respondent No.1 was taken to District Dispensary

at Muzzafar Nagar, U.P. then to Dr. M. Prakash Hospital at

Meerut where he remained for six days and thereafter shifted

to Sunder Lal Jain Hospital, Delhi. After four days, he was

referred to Saroj Hospital where he remained in coma for two

months. He was unable to identify anybody. His fractured

hand could not be operated upon due to his body condition.

He has become 100% permanent disabled due to the

accident in question.

3. Respondent No.1 has been brought in Court in wheel

chair. He is 100% disabled and does not recognize anybody.

Respondent No.1 was 25 years old at the time of the

accident and was working with M/s C.P. Systems Private

Limited at a salary of Rs.5,800/- per month. The learned

Tribunal took the future prospects into consideration and

applied the multiplier of 17 to compute the loss of

dependency at Rs.17,74,800/-. The learned Tribunal

awarded Rs.1,00,000/- towards pain and suffering,

Rs.1,00,000/- towards attendant charges and Rs.20,000/-

towards special diet and conveyance. The total

compensation awarded is Rs.22,20,521/-.

4. The only ground urged by learned counsel for the

appellant at the time of hearing of this appeal is that the

income of respondent No.1 was not sufficiently proved.

5. The learned counsel for respondent No.1 submits that

the employer of respondent No.1 came in the witness box as

PW-2 and he proved the salary of respondent No.1 by salary

certificate, Ex.PW2/1.

6. In that view of the matter, there is no merit in the

contention raised by the appellant.

7. It is noted that the learned Tribunal has not awarded

any compensation for loss of amenities of life, disfiguration

as well loss of matrimonial prospects to which respondent

No.1 is entitled too. Although Rs.1,00,000/- has been

awarded for attendant charges but no compensation has

been awarded to respondent No.1 for future treatment.

Respondent No.1 is 100% disabled and is leading a vegetable

life. He is staying at Himachal Pradesh, District Mandi with

his mother and brother and expenses are being incurred on

his day to day care. The amount awarded by the learned

Tribunal needs enhancement. However, since no cross-

objections has been filed by respondent No.1, no further

order is required to be passed in this appeal.

8. At this stage, the mother of respondent No.1 submits

that she is illiterate lady and was not aware and was not

advised properly as to the rights of respondent No.1 to seek

enhancement. The mother of respondent No.1 seeks liberty

to file appeal to seek enhancement of the award amount.

9. In the facts and circumstances of this case, the appeal

is dismissed.

10. The appellant has deposited the entire award amount

with the Registrar General of this Court out of which 50% has

already been released to respondent No.1. With respect to

the remaining 50% lying with the Registrar General, the

Registrar General is directed to release Rs.1,00,000/- to

respondent No.1 through his mother and the remaining

amount be kept in fixed deposit with UCO Bank, Delhi High

Court Branch for a period of five years on which monthly

interest be paid to the mother of respondent No.1.

11. The interest on the aforesaid fixed deposit shall be paid

monthly by automatic credit of interest to the mother of

respondent No.1 in her Savings Bank Account bearing

No.21400110001059 at Village Devbrarta P.O. Devbrarta,

Tehsil : Sarkaghat, District Mandi, Himanchal - 175024.

12. The learned counsel for respondent No.1 submits that

respondent No.1 has visited Delhi only to attend this case

and, therefore, if the amount is released within a period of

one week, respondent No.1 would be saved from the

botheration of visiting Delhi again.

13. The Registry is directed to release the balance award

amount to respondent No.1 in terms of this order within one

week.

14. Copy of this order be given 'Dasti' to learned counsel

for both the parties under signature of Court Master.

J.R. MIDHA, J DECEMBER 14, 2009 mk