Delhi High Court
Reliance General Insurance Co. ... vs Suman Jee Jha & Ors on 24 November, 2016
$~6
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
% Date of Decision: 24th October, 2016
+ MAC.APP. 833/2012
RELIANCE GENERAL INSURANCE CO. LTD ..... Petitioner
Through: Mr. A.K. Soni, Adv.
Versus
SUMAN JEE JHA & ORS ..... Respondent
Through: Mr. L.B. Rai and Mr. Mohit
Kumar Sharma, Advs. for R1.
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE J.R. MIDHA
JUDGMENT (ORAL)
1. The appellant has challenged the award of Claims Tribunal
whereby compensation of Rs.15,61,164/- has been awarded to
respondent No.1. The accident dated 05th November, 2008 resulted in
the amputation of right arm below elbow of the respondent No.1. The
permanent disability suffered by the appellant has been assessed to be
70%. The Claims Tribunal awarded Rs.8,521/- towards medical
expenses, Rs.9,98,001/- towards loss of future income, Rs.24,642/-
towards loss of income, Rs.15,000/- towards his special diet, Rs.
15,000/- towards conveyance charges and Rs.2,00,000/- towards
future treatment medical expenses, Rs. 1,00,000/- towards pain and
suffering and Rs.2,00,000/- towards loss of amenities. The total
compensation awarded is Rs.15,61,164/-.
2. Learned counsel for the appellant urged at the time of hearing of
this appeal that the compensation awarded to respondent No.1 is on
higher side and it warrants reduction. It is further submitted that the
respondent No.1 was contributory negligent and, therefore, the
compensation is liable to be reduced on that account. Learned counsel
for the appellant further submits that compensation of Rs.55,000/-
towards litigation expenses and Rs.5,000/- towards expenses be set
aside.
3. Respondent No.1 is present in Court and his permanent
disability has been seen. Respondent No.1 was earlier working as a
driver. However, he is unable to driver after the accident due to the
amputation of the right hand. Considering the functional disability of
respondent No.1, the compensation awarded by the Claims Tribunal is
just, fair and reasonable and does not warrant any reduction.
4. There is no infirmity in the finding of negligence of the driver
of the offending vehicle since he did not enter into the witness box to
rebut the evidence of negligence by respondent No.1. The
compensation of Rs.15,61,164/- awarded by the Claims Tribunal
along with interest @ 9% is upheld. However, the litigation expenses
of Rs.55,000/- awarded by the Claims Tribunal is set aside. The appeal
is allowed in the above terms.
5. The appellant has deposited the entire award amount with the
UCO Bank, Delhi High Court Branch out of which Rs.4,61,250/- has
been released to the appellant and the balance amount is lying in fixed
deposit. UCO Bank, Delhi High Court Branch is directed to release
further 10% of the amount lying in fixed deposit and the balance
amount be kept in 10 FDRs of each equal amount in the name of
respondent No.1 for a period of 6 months, 1 year, 2 years, 3 years, 4
years, 5 years, 6 years, 7 years, 8 years and 9 years.
6. The monthly interest on the FDRs shall be credited in the
savings bank account of respondent No.1.
7. At the time of maturity, the fixed deposit amount shall be
automatically credited in the savings bank account of respondent
No.1.
8. All the original FDRs shall be retained by UCO Bank, Delhi
High Court Branch. However, the photocopies of the same shall be
provided to the respondent No.1.
9. No cheque book or debit card be issued to respondent No.1
without permission of this Court.
10. No loan or advance or pre-mature discharge shall be permitted
without the permission of this Court.
11. Respondent No.1 shall approach the UCO Bank for completing
the formalities for the disbursement of the award amount in terms of
this order.
12. UCO Bank, Delhi High Court Branch shall ensure that the
savings bank account of respondent No.1 is an individual account and
not joint account.
13. Copy of this judgment be given dasti to counsels for the parties
under signatures of the Court Master.
OCTOBER 24, 2016 J.R. MIDHA, J.
ak
