Deepak vs Surender Kumar & Ors.
2011 Latest Caselaw 6033 Del

$~21
*    IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

                                        Date of decision: 9th December, 2011
+       MAC APP. 422/2010

        DEEPAK                                         ..... Appellant
                         Through:     Mr. Navneet Goyal, Adv.

                                      Versus

        SURENDER KUMAR & ORS.                             ..... Respondents
                Through: None.

        CORAM:
        HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE G.P.MITTAL

                                JUDGMENT

G. P. MITTAL, J. (ORAL)

1. The Appellant seeks enhancement of compensation in respect of 10% permanent disability suffered by him in respect of left elbow (on account of stiffness) in a motor accident, which took place on 09.05.2007. The Appellant is a young boy of 16 years.

2. The Tribunal has granted a compensation of ` 83,200/- with interest @ 7.5.% per annum. The compensation awarded is tabulated hereunder: -

         Sl. Head of Compensation              Compensation granted by the
         No.                                   Tribunal

1. Compensation for pain & ` 20,000/-

sufferings

2. Compensation for expenses ` 3,000/-

                   incurred   on     medical


                    treatment

         3.        Compensation for special        ` 3,000/-
                   diet

         4.        Compensation for                ` 2,000/-
                   conveyance charges

         5.        Compensation for loss of        ` 25,000/-
                   enjoyment of amenities of
                   life & general damages

         6.        Compensation on account of      ` 20,000/-
                   inconvenience, hardship,
                   discomfort, disappointment,
                   frustration and mental stress
                   in life

         7.        Compensation on account of      ` 10,000/-
                   curtailment of chances of
                   marriage prospects

                   Total                           ` 83,200/-

3. A very short submission is raised by the learned counsel for the Appellant that the Appellant suffered 10% permanent disability in relation to his left elbow still no compensation on account of loss of future earning capacity was granted. In Raj Kumar v. Ajay Kumar & Anr., (2011) 1 SCC 343 it was laid down by the Supreme Court that permanent disability and loss of earning capacity are two different things. The permanent disability will have relation to the victim's avocation, to assess the extent of the loss of earning capacity. Thus, loss of earning capacity has to be established by the Appellant for grant of compensation under this head. The Appellant is a student and he may really not have permanent disability affecting his earning capacity. As can be seen from para 2 above a compensation of ` 75,000/-

under non-pecuniary heads was granted in addition to the actual expenses on treatment, special diet and conveyance charges. It cannot be said that the compensation is not just and proper rather the compensation is more than adequate.

4. The appeal is devoid of any merit. I refrain from imposing any cost as the Appellant is a victim and is a young boy.

5. The appeal is accordingly dismissed.

(G.P. MITTAL) JUDGE DECEMBER 9, 2011 hs