Raj Mangal Yadav vs Abhishek Mittal & Ors.
2017 Latest Caselaw 3243 Del

$~R-56
*    IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
                                         Decided on: 13th July, 2017
+      MAC APPEAL 590/2008

       RAJ MANGAL YADAV                            ..... Appellant
                   Through:          Mr. M.A. Khan, Advocate

                          versus

       ABHISHEK MITTAL & ORS.              ..... Respondents
                    Through: Mr. Pankaj Seth, Adv. for R-3
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE R.K.GAUBA

                    JUDGMENT (ORAL)

1. The appellant had suffered injuries in a motor vehicular accident that occurred on 23.07.2005. On his claim petition (suit no.190/2008), the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal (Tribunal) awarded compensation in his favour directing the third respondent herein (insurer) to pay since the offending vehicle (a Honda City car bearing no.DL-7CF-0736) was insured against third party risk with it. The compensation was computed as under :-

     Medical Treatment                      Rs.35,000/-
     Conveyance                             Rs.15,000/-
     Special Diet                           Rs.7,500/-
     Loss of Income                         Rs.70,000/-
     Loss of Earning Capacity               Rs.3,65,000/-
     Loss of Amenities of Life              Rs.35,000/-
     Attendant Charges                      Rs.10,000/-
     Pain and Agony                         Rs.35,000/-
     Total                                  Rs.5,72,500/-

2. The appeal at hand seeking enhancement of compensation is pressed only on two counts It is argued that the loss of income calculated for ten months was deficient as the treatment of the claimant requiring four surgeries was spread over two years, the plea being that loss of income should have been calculated for 24 months. The other contention is that the award of Rs.35,000/- on account of pain and agony is deficient.

3. Given the nature of injuries suffered and the prolonged treatment undergone, the contentions on both above-noted counts must be accepted.

4. The appellant had suffered multiple fractures they being in right leg, right arm and head. He was operated four times including once for fixing the fractured bones, second time for surgical procedure on the knee resulting in implant, third time for removal of the implant and finally for nailing and bone-grafting. Given the prolonged period of treatment, the loss of income is recalculated as (Rs.7,000/- x 24) Rs. 1,68,000/- instead of Rs.70,000/-.

5. In the facts and circumstances noted above, award on account of pain and agony is increased to Rs.1 Lakh (Rupees one lakh) instead of Rs.35,000/-.

6. Thus, there would be a net increase of Rs.1,63,000/-. Ordered accordingly. Needless to add, it shall carry interest as levied by the Tribunal.

7. The insurance company shall pay by depositing the enhanced amount of compensation with the Tribunal within thirty days of today whereupon the same shall be released.

8. The appeal is disposed of in above terms.

R.K.GAUBA, J.

JULY 13, 2017 yg