Delhi High Court
Ajit Singh vs Anil Dhanker & Ors. on 16 October, 2012
Author: G.P. Mittal
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
Date of decision: 16th October, 2012
+ MAC. APP. No.389/2009
AJIT SINGH ..... Appellant
Through: Ms.Shantha Devi Raman, Advocate.
Versus
ANIL DHANKER & ORS. ..... Respondents
Through: Ms.Suman Bagga, Advocate
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE G.P.MITTAL
JUDGMENT
G. P. MITTAL, J. (ORAL)
1. The Appellant Ajit Singh who was working as a Constable (Traffic) in
Delhi Police suffered comminuted fracture middle lower 1/3rd of both
bones left leg and was awarded a compensation of Rs.1,22,000/-. The
Appellant seeks enhancement of compensation primarily on the ground
that compensation awarded towards pain and suffering, loss of leave,
special diet and conveyance is on the lower side.
2. In the absence of any Appeal by the driver, the owner or the insurer of the
offending vehicle, the finding on negligence has attained finality.
3. The compensation of `1,22,000/- awarded by the Claims Tribunal is
tabulated hereunder:-
Sl. Compensation under various heads Awarded by
No. the Claims
Tribunal
1. Medical Expenses `32,000/-
2. Pain & Suffering ` 20,000/-
3. Compensation on account of Leave ` 50,000/-
4. Special diet ` 10,000/-
5. Conveyance `10,000/-
Total `1,22,000/-
4. The following contentions are raised on behalf of the Appellants-
(i) The Appellant suffered serious injuries and had to take leave
for 331 days. His salary was retrospectively revised from
01.01.2006. He should have been paid compensation for loss of
leave as per the revised salary w.e.f. 01.01.2006 as was proved by
additional evidence.
(ii) The Appellant underwent surgery by which bolts were
placed in his leg in Maharaja Agrasen Hospital, Punjabi Bagh,
New Delhi. He remained admitted there from 10.11.2005 to
13.11.2005 and then on 08.05.2006, 08.02.2007, 10.04.2007 and
14.01.2008. It is urged that keeping in view the prolonged
treatment, the compensation of Rs.20,000/- towards pain and
suffering and Rs.10,000/- each towards special diet and
conveyance was on the lower side.
5. The Appeal must succeed on all the grounds.
6. During the pendency of the Appeal, the Appellant moved an application
for additional evidence and proved that his salary was revised w.e.f.
01.01.2006. Revised salary in tabulated form was proved as Ex. AW1/1
and Ex.AW2/1. The salary admissible for the period of leave, that is,
09.11.2005 upto October, 2006 was about `1,25,000/- and only a sum of
`50,000/- was awarded towards compensation on account of leave. The
tortfeasor is under obligation to put victim in the same position as if no
wrong was done to the injured.
7. Thus, the Appellant was entitled to a sum of Rs.1,25,000/- towards loss of
leave for 130 days since the time of accident.
8. Keeping in view of the surgery, the period of hospitalization, the period
of confinement at home, the compensation of Rs.20,000/- awarded
towards pain and suffering is enhanced to Rs.50,000/-. Similarly, the
compensation of Rs.10,000/- towards special diet and conveyance is
raised to Rs.20,000/- each.
9. The compensation awarded is re-computed as under:
"
Sl. Compensation under Awarded by Awarded
No. various heads the Claims by this
Tribunal Court
1. Medical Expenses `32,000/- `32,000/-
2. Pain & Suffering ` 20,000/- `50,000/-
3. Compensation on account ` 50,000/- `1,25,000/-
of Leave
4. Special diet ` 10,000/- `20,000/-
5. Conveyance `10,000/- `20,000/-
Total `1,22,000/- `2,47,00/-
10. Thus, the compensation stands enhanced by ` 1,25,000/- which shall
carry interest @ 7.5% from the date of filing of the Petition till its
payment.
11. The Appeal is allowed in above terms.
12. Pending Applications stand disposed of.
(G.P. MITTAL)
JUDGE
OCTOBER 16, 2012
v
