Delhi High Court
Somnath Chatterjee vs Ramzan Khan & Ors on 17 January, 2012
Author: G.P. Mittal
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
Decided on: 17th January, 2012
+ MAC.APP. 736/2011
SOMNATH CHATTERJEE ..... Appellant
Through: Mr. Navneet Goyal, Adv. with
Ms. Suman N. Rawat, Adv.
versus
RAMZAN KHAN & ORS ..... Respondent
Through: Ms. Neerja Sachdeva, Adv.
for R-3.
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE G.P.MITTAL
JUDGMENT
G. P. MITTAL, J. (ORAL)
1. Appellant Somnath Chatterjee seeks enhancement of
compensation of `3,16,498/- awarded by the Motor Accident
Claims Tribunal (the Tribunal) for the injuries suffered by him
in a motor accident which took place on 13.11.2008.
2. During inquiry before the Tribunal, it was established that the
Petitioner suffered multiple laceration on the face and grievous
injuries on eye. Surgery was conducted and eyelids of both the
eyes were also repaired. He had also suffered loss of vision in
the right eye. He had also suffered loss of about 20% of the
upper lip. He had lost medial side of right eyebrow, laceration
over right upper and lower eyelid, laceration of size 6 cm x 3
cm over right cheek. There is a loss of upper lip of around 20%
along with ragged laceration and loss of lower lip of around
15% columella loss present with nasal fracture alongwith facial
swelling. He was again advised to attend OPD for review and
for further surgery. Further medical treatment record shows that
he was again admitted in Sir Ganga Ram hospital from
20.11.2008 to 21.11.2008 and in this period he was treated for
fracture of orbital area; bone grafting was conducted and
wounds were closed. At the time of review on 20.11.2008 it has
been opined that he has very low vision in his right eye. He was
again advised to attend OPD for further medical treatment.
Further medical treatment of Sir Ganga Ram Hospital dated
24.11.2008 shows that he was advised medicines again by the
concerned doctor.
3. The Tribunal by the impugned judgment awarded a
compensation of ` 3,16,498/- which is extracted hereunder:-
1. Medicines and medical treatment ` 1,64,400/-
2. Loss of wages ` 22,098/-
3. Pain and suffering ` 50,000/-
4. Conveyance & Special Diet ` 20,000/-
5. Loss of amenities of life & future prospect ` 60,000/-
Total ` 3,16,498/-
4. It is urged by the learned counsel for the Appellant that on the
date of the accident, the Appellant was a young boy of 24 years.
He was working as a Physiotherapist. There was loss of five
teeth apart from loss of 20% of the upper lip along with right
laceration. There was loss lower lip 15% with nasal fracture.
The Appellant remained admitted in the hospital from
14.11.2008 to 18.11.2008. Thereafter, he remained an Out Door
Patient. It is contended that there was loss of vision in the right
eye for some time and it can be recovered only by rational lazer
treatment.
5. Learned counsel for the Appellant submits that apart from loss
of amenities because of loss of five teeth and the permanent
disfigurement on the face, there would be loss of prospects of
marriage and it cannot be compensated in terms of money; yet
appropriate compensation ought to have been granted by the
Tribunal.
6. Compensation for loss of prospects of marriage was required to
be granted by the Tribunal as there was partial loss of upper and
lower lips, nasal fracture apart from loss of five teeth which
would lead to a permanent scar on the face. The compensation
awarded is re-assessed as under:-
1. Medicines and medical treatment ` 1,64,400/-
2. Loss of wages ` 22,098/-
3. Pain and suffering ` 50,000/-
4. Conveyance & Special Diet ` 20,000/-
5. Loss of amenities of life and marriage ` 1,50,000/-
prospects
6. Disfigurement ` 50,000/-
Total ` 4,56,498/-
7. The enhanced compensation of ` 1,40,000/- shall carry interest
@ 7.5 % per annum from the date of the petition till the
payment. Respondent No.3 ICICI Lombard General Insurance
Company Limited is directed to deposit the compensation
awarded within 30 days along with the upto date interest with
UCO Bank, Delhi High Court Branch, New Delhi.
8. 75% of the amount shall be held in fixed deposit for a period of
three years and rest of the amount shall be released to the
Appellant forthwith.
9. The Appeal is allowed in above terms.
10. Pending applications also stand disposed of.
(G.P. MITTAL)
JUDGE
JANUARY 17, 2012
vk
