Delhi High Court
Anil Kumar vs Dharam Singh on 25 May, 2012
Author: G.P. Mittal
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
Date of decision:25th May, 2012
+ MAC APP. 83/2004
ANIL KUMAR ..... Appellant
Through: Mr.S.N.Parashar, Advocate
Versus
DHARAM SINGH ..... Respondent
Through: None.
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE G.P.MITTAL
JUDGMENT
G. P. MITTAL, J. (ORAL)
1. The Appeal is for enhancement of compensation of ` 1,42,200/-
awarded to the Appellant for having suffered injuries in an
accident which occurred on 02.11.1998.
2. The Motor Accident Claims Tribunal (hereinafter referred as
the Claims Tribunal) awarded a compensation of `1,42,200/-
which is tabulated hereunder:-
Pain and Suffering : ` 1,00,000/-
Loss of leaves : ` 22,164/-
Promotion Chances : ` 20,000/-
3. The Appellant's grievance is that it was established on record
that the Appellant suffered fracture of pelvis and remained
confined to hospital for a period 02.11.1998 to 05.11.1998 and
remained on leave for five months and 20 days a compensation
of `22,164/- awarded towards loss of leave of five months and
20 days was on the lower side; it was proved on record that the
Appellant's salary was `5,541/- per month and thus the
compensation works out to be `31,000/-; bills towards treatment
(Ex.P5 to P17) for ` 3,220/- were proved but the Claims
Tribunal did not grant its reimbursement. It is urged that no
compensation has been awarded towards special diet and
conveyance.
4. The Appeal must succeed. While awarding compensation the
Claims Tribunal ought to have granted full damages when the
same can be ascertained. The guess work is permissible in
cases where it is not possible to arrive at the exact figure.
5. Para 15 and 16 of the impugned judgment are extracted
hereunder:-
"15. The MLC was conducted in the Khosla hospital and
as per the same, the petitioner sustained multiple blunt
injuries on chest abdomen and left knee. He was
vomiting when he was admitted, although he was
conscious and oriented. Ultimately, it was diagnosed
that he sustained fracture on pelvis and Lt. Ribs Nos. 1,
3, 4 & 5. The discharge slip proved on record, as
Ex.PW-2/2, collectively, proves that petitioner remained
admitted in Khosla hospital from 02.11.1998 to
05.11.1998. He was discharged from the hospital on
request. The original bill Ex.P5-17 shows that petitioner
incurred an expenses of `3,220/-. The petitioner has
proved on record the supporting prescriptions.
16. Apart from this, the petitioner being constable in
Delhi Police, remained on medical rest from 02.11.21998
to 22.04.1999. As per the certificate issued from
Assistant Commissioner of Police, Sh. Ravi Sehgal,
Central District Delhi, which is Ex.P1, he has suffered
loss of encashment of leaves, he would otherwise, have
been entitled to all these expenditures. Taking his total
salary as a `5,541/- per month, as per Ex.PE3/1,
petitioner would have been entitled to a sum of ` 22,164/-
. As the petitioner is employed with Delhi Police, he
would certainly have been reimbursed from the
department for the actual medical expenses incurred by
him, had he applied for the same, this is not so."
6. In the circumstances, I award a sum of `3,220/- towards
treatment received by the Appellant in Khosla Hospital.
`31,000/- as against ` 22,164/- awarded by the Claims Tribunal
and a sum of `5,000/- each towards conveyance and special
diet.
7. Overall compensation is enhanced from `1,42,000/- to
1,64,056/-. The enhanced compensation of `22056 shall carry
interest @ 9% per annum from the date of filing of the petition
till the date of judgment i.e. 01.12.2003 the date of the award
passed by the Claims Tribunal and @ 7.5% per annum
thereafter till the payment. The enhanced amount along with
interest shall be deposited in the name of Appellant in UCO
Bank, Delhi High Court Branch. It shall be released on deposit.
8. The Appeal is allowed in above terms.
9. Pending applications also stand disposed of.
(G.P. MITTAL)
JUDGE
MAY 25, 2012
mr
