Gajender Singh Chauhan vs Seema Arya & Ors.
2013 Latest Caselaw 3808 Del

$~11
*    IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

%             Judgment delivered on: 29th August, 2013


+      MAC.APP. 1158/2012
GAJENDER SINGH CHAUHAN                           ..... Appellant
                     Through:               Mr. J.S. Kanwar, Advocate.

                          Versus

SEEMA ARYA & ORS.                             ..... Respondents
                                Through:    Ms. Rakhi Dubey, Advocate for
                                            Respondent No.3/Insurance
                                            Company.
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SURESH KAIT

SURESH KAIT, J. (Oral)

1. Instant appeal has been preferred for enahancement against the impugned award dated 26.03.2012, whereby ld. Tribunal has granted compensation as under:-

"Expenditure on treatment : Rs.3,50,000/-

       Pain and sufferings            :    Rs.10,000/-
       Special diet and conveyance    :    Rs.5,000/-
       Loss of Income                 :    Rs.5,780/-

___________________________________________ Total : Rs.3,70,780/-

___________________________________________"

2. Thereafter vide order dated 17.07.2012, ld. Tribunal modified the award and recorded as under:

"The perusal of the file reveals that vide order dated 13.07.2012 the application under Section 152 CPC for correction of the Award dated 26.03.2012 wad disposed off and necessary correction was made.

Vide order dated 13.07.2012, the total amount of compensation was rectified and Award dated 26.03.2012 was modified / rectified accordingly.

Vide award dated 26.03.2012, a compensation of Rs.3,70,780/- was awarded. As Rs.2,00,000/- was granted as cost of treatment instead of Rs.3,50,000/-, so out of the total amount of compensation, i.e., Rs.3,70,780/-, after deducting the difference of Rs.1,50,000/-, the total amount of compensation comes to Rs.2,20,780/-. So, the total amount of compensation is rectified to Rs.2,20,780/- instead of 3,70,780/-. So, order dated 26.03.2012 is modified / rectified accordingly. A copy of this order be tagged with the Award dated 26.03.2012 and order sheet dated 26.03.2012.

This order is part and parcel of the Award dated 26.03.2012and order sheet dated 26.03.2012 and the same be read accordingly."

3. Ld. Counsel appearing on behalf of the appellant submits that appellant sustained injuries on head, which were serious in nature and ld. Tribunal has granted less award amount. Further submits that ld. Tribunal has erred in awarding the loss of income on account of leave and erred in considering the income of the injured.

4. Ld. Counsel further submits that towards the pain and suffering, ld. Tribunal has only granted Rs.10,000/-, whereas keeping the injuries into view, it should have been more than that.

5. On perusal of the record, it is revealed that appellant / injured stated in his affidavit Ex.P-1 that he sustained grievous injuries (right temporal EDH and Temporal Contusion) in his head and other parts of the body. He remained admitted in Kailash Hospital, NOIDA from 24.09.2004 to 04.10.12004. One operation on the head was also done by the Doctors. He spent Rs.2,09,490/- for his treatment, conveyance and special diet besides the medicines purchased from the market. The appellant filed medical bills of Rs.1,84,076/-. Accordingly, expenditure incurred on his treatment is estimated as Rs.2,00,000/- by learned Tribunal.

6. In view of the nature of injuries sustained by the appellant / injured and he remained admitted in the hospital, the amount of compensation on account of pain and suffering is assessed as Rs.10,000/-. The appellant in his affidavit stated that he was running a Kariyana shop and used to earn about Rs.300/- to Rs.350/- per day. Due to the injuries suffered by him, he could not operate his shop and his shop remained closed during the said period. Since the appellant has not placed any record to this effect, therefore, ld. Tribunal has calculated the income of the appellant on the basis of minimum wages. On the date of accident, i.e., on 23.09.2004, the minimum wages of unskilled person was Rs.2,894.P/- per month which is rounded off to Rs.2,895/- per month. So, the ld. Tribunal has granted two months' loss of income which comes to Rs.2,895 x 2, i.e., Rs.5780/-.

7. Keeping in view the facts and circumstances of the case and submissions of ld. Counsel for the parties, I do not deem it appropriate to enhance the amount and find no discrepancy in the order passed by the ld. Tribunal.

8. Accordingly, instant appeal is dismissed.

CM. NO. 18695/2012 In view of the above, instant application has become infructuous and dismissed as such.

SURESH KAIT, J.

AUGUST 29, 2013 jg