Delhi High Court
Sudarshan Lal Luthra vs Kavinder Singh & Ors. on 7 August, 2012
Author: G.P. Mittal
$~3
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
Date of decision: 7th August, 2012
+ MAC. APP. No.574/2007
SUDARSHAN LAL LUTHRA ..... Appellant
Through: Mr. Rakesh Nautiyal, Advocate
Versus
KAVINDER SINGH & ORS. ..... Respondents
Through: Mr. Manoj R. Sinha, Advocate for the
Respondent No.3 Insurance Company
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE G.P.MITTAL
JUDGMENT
G. P. MITTAL, J. (ORAL)
1. The Appeal is for enhancement of compensation of Rs.52,500/- awarded
in favour of the Appellant by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal(the
Claims Tribunal) for having suffered injuries in a motor vehicle accident
which occurred on 26.08.1996.
2. In the absence of any Appeal by the owner, driver or the Insurance
Company, the finding on negligence has attained finality.
3. During inquiry before the Claims Tribunal, it was claimed that the
Appellant was aged 62 years at the time of the accident; he retired as an
English Teacher from a Senior Higher Secondary School; he was getting
a pension of Rs.6,000/- per month and was earning Rs.5,000/- per month
from tuition. The Appellant could not produce any evidence with regard
to the expenditure incurred on his treatment in Sir Ganga Ram Hospital as
the record was weeded out. The Claims Tribunal made a guess work with
regard to the award of Rs.20,000/- towards the expenditure on medical
treatment. It further awarded a sum of Rs.10,000/- each towards pain and
suffering, loss of enjoyment and amenities in life and loss of income. A
further sum of Rs.2,500/- was awarded towards conveyance and special
diet.
4. Section 168 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 (the Act) envisages grant of
compensation which must be just and reasonable. Thus, the
compensation should neither be a pittance nor a bonanza.
5. The Appellant was an old man. According to him, he gave instructions to
an Advocate to file the Claim Petition, but could not keep track thereof
and the counsel expired. Thus, a fresh Claim Petition was filed after nine
years of the accident, that is, in the year 2005.
6. Trial Court record shows that immediately after the accident, the
Appellant was admitted in Muni Maya Ram Jain Hospital. The MLC
Ex.PW2/2 shows that the Appellant suffered central dislocation of left
hip. A disability certificate was obtained by the Appellant after filing of
the instant Appeal on 01.04.2010 whereby he was declared to be
suffering from 45% disability on account of post-traumatic Arthritis
(Left) Hip. AW2, Dr. K.L. Kalra examined by way of additional
evidence during pendency of this Appeal deposed that the central
dislocation of hip restricts daily activities like sitting, cross-legs, running,
squatting, running upstairs because of pain. Thus, the compensation of
Rs.10,000/- each awarded towards pain and suffering and loss of
amenities was on the lower side. The same is enhanced to Rs.25,000/-
under each head as against Rs.10,000/- each awarded by the Claims
Tribunal.
7. According to the Appellant, he was earning Rs.5,000/- per month by way
of private tuition. No evidence was adduced with regard to the same.
According to him, he was getting a pension of Rs.6,000/- per month.
Any income beyond Rs.40,000/- per annum in the A.Y. 1997-98 was
subject to Income Tax. No Income Tax Return was placed on record. No
cogent evidence was produced to show that the Appellant was engaged in
private tuition. In the circumstances, it would be difficult to assess the
exact loss of earning capacity. Considering that the accident took place
in the year 1996, I would make a provision of Rs.30,000/- as loss of
earning capacity on account of disability as against Rs.10,000/- awarded
by the Claims Tribunal. Similarly, the compensation of Rs.2,500/-
awarded towards conveyance and special diet is increased to Rs.10,000/-
( that is, Rs.5,000/- each towards conveyance and special diet).
8. The compensation awarded is tabulated as under:
Sl. Compensation under Awarded by Awarded by
various heads the Claims this Court
No. Tribunal
1. Pain and Suffering `10,000/- `25,000/-
2. Loss of Enjoyment and ` 10,000/- ` 25,000/-
Loss of Amenities in Life
3. Loss of Income/Future ` 10,000/- ` 30,000/-
Income
4. Conveyance/Special Diet ` 2,500/- ` 10,000/-
5. Reimbursement of ` 20,000/- ` 25,000/-
Medical Expenses
Total ` 52,500/- ` 1,15,000/-
9. Thus, the compensation is enhanced by Rs.62,500/- which shall carry
interest @ 7.5% per annum from the date of filing of the Petition till its
payment.
10. The enhanced compensation of Rs.62,500/- along with interest shall be
deposited by the Respondent No.3 National Insurance Company Ltd. with
the Claims Tribunal within six weeks. The same shall be released to the
Appellant on deposit.
11. The Appeal is allowed in above terms.
12. Pending Applications stand disposed of.
(G.P. MITTAL)
JUDGE
AUGUST 07, 2012
pst
