Delhi High Court
Mukesh vs Chaman Lal & Ors on 26 September, 2014
$~A-9
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
Date of decision: 26.09.2014
+ MAC.APP. 1015/2012
MUKESH ..... Appellant
Through Mr.S.N.Parashar, Adv.
versus
CHAMAN LAL & ORS ..... Respondents
Through Mr.Manoj Bhandari, Adv. for the
insurance company
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE JAYANT NATH
JAYANT NATH, J. (ORAL)
1. The present appeal is filed seeking to enhance the compensation as
awarded in the Award dated 6.3.2012. The brief facts are that the claimant
Mukesh on 09.07.2006 was driving his motorcycle and Sukhpal was sitting
as a pillion rider. They were proceeding towards Delhi. At village Daluhera,
U.P. they were hit by a tempo stated to be driven at a very high speed in a
rash and negligent manner. The appellant fell down and sustained serious
injuries. Pillion rider Sukhpal expired in the accident.
2. Based on the evidence on record the Tribunal held that the accident
took place due to the rash and negligent driving of the tempo driven by
respondent No.1.
3. On compensation the Tribunal awarded the following compensation:-
"Estimated cost on medical expenses : Rs.1,50,000/-
Towards amenities and future : Rs.1,00,000/-
Prospects
Pain and sufferings : Rs.20,000/-
Conveyance : Rs.20,000/-
Special diet : Rs.20,000/-
Loss of income : Rs.50,000/-
TOTAL : Rs.3,60,000/-
4. The Tribunal noted that the appellant was working as a regular safai
karmchari in MCD earning Rs.14,000/- per month. The Tribunal also noted
that as per disability certificate the appellant had suffered permanent
disability of 73% in relation to right side lower limb and both upper limbs.
5. However, as the appellant was an employee of MCD, he suffered no
loss of income. Learned counsel appearing for the appellant has submitted
that the compensation awarded is on the lower side and seeks enhancement
of compensation. He firstly submits that the appellant was absent for a total
11 months from his office but has not been given any compensation for the
same. It is further submitted that for pain and sufferings a compensation of
only Rs.20,000/- has been awarded. He submits that this is grossly
inadequate. He further submits that no payment has been made for
disfigurement, conveyance and attendant charges.
6. Coming to the first submission of learned counsel for the appellant,
about 11 months leave, the appellant had produced Shri Chander Kant
Sharma LDC from the MCD. The said witness has said that the appellant
was absent from duty from 1.7.2006 till 2.5.2007. Keeping this in account
the Tribunal noted that the appellant had taken leave on account of the
accident otherwise he would have availed leave for other purposes. The
Tribunal has awarded Rs.50,000/- on account of loss of income for the leave
taken.
7. A perusal of the Award shows that the Tribunal noted that there is no
evidence on record to show that the leave taken by the appellant was
actually in connection with the injuries sustained. It is common knowledge
that employees of the Municipal Corporation are often taking leave for all
kinds of reasons. Further, there is nothing to show that the leave was
encashable and if it was encashable how much was encashable and what is
the actual loss suffered by the appellant on this count. In the absence of any
details or any proper evidence, the Tribunal has rightly awarded a sum of
Rs.50,000/- on account of pain and suffering.
8. Coming to the other issues, namely, pain and suffering, future
conveyance and loss of amenities.
9. The Tribunal noted that as per evidence of the appellant he has
sustained multiple fracture on both hands, fracture on right shoulder,
multiple fracture on right leg. After admission in GTB hospital, he was
admitted to St.Stephen Hospital, Delhi where he was admitted from
9.7.2006 to 31.7.2006. He was operated there and a steel rod was inserted in
his legs. He was again admitted in St.Stephen Hospital from 18.8.2006 to
28.8.2006.
10. Based on the above facts, the Tribunal has granted a sum of
Rs.20,000/- for pain and sufferings.
11. It may be noted that as per the Disability Certificate the appellant has
suffered 73% permanent disability in relation to right side lower limb and
both upper limbs. He has remained admitted in St.Stephens hospital from
9.7.2006 to 31.7.2006. He was thereafter again admitted form 18.8.2006 to
28.8.2006. He had multiple fractures of both hands, right shoulder and right
leg. Reference may be had to the judgment of the Supreme Court in the case
of Neerupam Mohan Mathur vs. New India Assurance Company Ltd.,
2013 ACJ 2122. That was also a case of disability of 73% and the Supreme
Court had awarded Rs.1 lac for pain and suffering and Rs.1 lac for loss of
expectation of life. Reference may also be had to the judgments of the
Supreme Court in the case of V. Mekala vs. M. Malathi & Anr. 2014 ACJ
1441 and Rekha Jain vs. National Insurance Company Limited in Civil
Appeal Nos.5370-5372 of 2013 dated August 01, 2013.
12. Given the nature of pain and sufferings suffered by the appellant, I
increase compensation for pain and sufferings to Rs.1 lac from Rs.20,000/-.
13. No amount has been awarded by the Tribunal towards shortening of
expectation of life. I award a sum of Rs.1 lac for the same.
14. On the issue of conveyance learned counsel has submitted that there is
no compensation awarded for future conveyance. The Tribunal has noted
the stand of the appellant that he has spent Rs.40,000/- on conveyance. This
was not accepted as no proof in this regard has been filed. Accordingly,
Rs.20,000/- was awarded which related to the cost of conveyance as already
spent.
15. Given the nature of disability suffered, in my opinion, the appellant
should have also been compensated for conveyance, after the filing of the
claim petition. I enhance the amount of compensation for conveyance from
Rs.20,000/- to Rs.50,000/-.
16. Similarly for attendant charges there is no evidence placed on record
by the appellant to show the need for an attendant. It is on record that the
accident took place on 9.7.2006 and the appellant was admitted in hospital
on 9.7.2006 to 31.7.2006 and was again admitted in Hospital from 18.8.2006
to 28.8.2006. He must have been attended OPD thereafter for some days.
In this period when his treatment was going on he would certainly have
required assistance of an attendant. Accordingly, I award a sum of
Rs.30,000/- as attendant charges.
17. The total compensation would now read as under:-
" Estimated cost on medical expenses : Rs.1,50,000/-
Towards amenities and future : Rs.1,00,000/-
Prospects
Pain and sufferings : Rs.1,00,000/-
Conveyance : Rs.50,000/-
Special diet : Rs.20,000/-
Attendant charges : Rs.30,000/-
Loss of expectation of life : Rs.1,00,000/-
Loss of income : Rs.50,000/-
TOTAL : Rs.6,00,000/-
18. Respondent No.3 may deposit the additional amount alongwith
interest @ 7.5% per annum on the additional amount from the date of filing
of the claim petition till date. On receipt of the same the Registrar General
may release the same to the claimant/appellant.
19. Appeal stands disposed of.
JAYANT NATH, J
SEPTEMBER 26, 2014
n
