Delhi High Court
Lalan Verma vs Sonu Kumar Yadav & Ors. on 4 March, 2014
Author: Suresh Kait
$~2
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
% Judgment delivered on: 4th March, 2014
+ MAC.APP. 947/2013
LALAN VERMA ..... Appellant
Represented by: Mr. Rajnish K Jha, Adv.
Versus
SONU KUMAR YADAV & ORS. ..... Respondents
Represented by: Ms. Suman Bagga with Ms.
Shruti Shukla, Advs. for R-3.
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SURESH KAIT
SURESH KAIT, J. (Oral)
CM APPL. 16637/2013(Delay)
In view of the averments made in the application, the delay of 139
days in filing the instant appeal is condoned.
The application stands disposed of.
MAC.APP. 947/2013
1. The present appeal is preferred against the impugned award
dated 04.03.2013 whereby learned tribunal has awarded a compensation for
a sum of Rs. 43,145/- with interest @ 7.5 % per annum from the date of
filing the claim petition till realisation of the amount.
2. Counsel appearing on behalf of the appellant argued the appeal on a
sole ground that the injured/appellant received 28% disability in relation to
the left lower limb. However, learned Tribunal has failed to assess
functional disability and accordingly not granted any compensation to this
effect.
3. As per the disability certificate dated 28.09.2013 issued by Guru
Gobind Singh Government Hospital, Raghubir Nagar, New Delhi-110027,
the appellant was assessed 28% temporary physical disability in relation to
his left lower limb. The same was likely to improve following nail removal
and physiotherapy.
4. Since thereafter the disability of the appellant was not assessed,
therefore, vide order dated 23.10.2013, this Court directed the Medical
Superintendent of the aforesaid hospital to constitute a medical board and
assess the permanent disability suffered by the appellant.
5. Accordingly, vide report dated 07.01.2014, it is stated that the
permanent disability of the appellant is 25% in relation to his left lower
limb. His condition is non-progressive and not likely to improve. Re-
assessment of the same is also not recommended. This disability certificate
has been signed by three doctors and counter signed by the Medical
Superintendent of the hospital mentioned above.
6. Admittedly, the appellant is a rickshaw puller and was at the age of
39 years at the time of accident i.e. 15.12.2011. It is true that he would not
be able to pull the rickshaw with this disability. However, it cannot be said
that he cannot do some other work.
7. For assessing the physical disability the Court has to see the effect of
the injuries suffered by the appellant. Though he will have to live with 25%
permanent disability, accordingly, I assess this disability qua the whole
body. The Tribunal has assessed the monthly income of appellant as Rs.
6,656/-. Thus, loss of income on account of disability comes to
Rs.2,99,520/- (Rs.6,656X12X15X25/100).
8. Consequently, the compensation is enhanced by Rs.2,99,520/-. The
enhanced compensation shall also carry interest @ 7.5% per annum from
the date of filing of the claim petition till realization of the amount.
9. Accordingly, the respondent No.3/Insurance Company is directed to
deposit the enhanced compensation amount with upto date interest accrued
thereon with the Registrar General of this Court within a period of six weeks
from today, failing which, appellant/claimant shall be entitled for penal
interest @ 12% per annum on account of delayed payment.
10. On deposit, the Registrar General is directed to release the amount in
favour of the appellant/claimant in terms of the award dated 04.03.2013
passed by the learned Tribunal.
11. In view of the above, the appeal is allowed.
SURESH KAIT, J.
MARCH 04, 2014
cl/sb/jg
