Delhi High Court
United India Insurance Company ... vs Anil Kumar & Ors. on 8 September, 2017
$~R-178
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
Decided on: 8th September, 2017
+ MAC APPEAL No. 97/2010 and CM APPL.3126/2010,
3128/2010, 15661/2010
UNITED INDIA INSURANCE COMPANY LIMITED
..... Appellant
Through: Mr. Pankaj Seth, Advocate
versus
ANIL KUMAR & ORS. ..... Respondents
Through: Mr. O.P. Mannie, Advocate for
R-1.
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE R.K.GAUBA
JUDGMENT (ORAL)
1. The first respondent was moving on his motorcycle bearing
registration No.DL-8SA-J-2146 on 12.04.2007 with his friend Om
Prakash @ Jaggu on the pillion, when he came to be involved in a
motor vehicular accident caused due to negligent driving of Tata
Tempo bearing registration No.DL-IL-E-6359, admittedly insured
against third party risk with the appellant (the insurer) for the period in
question. Both suffered injuries, each instituting accident claim case,
the case of the first respondent being petition No.403/08. The tribunal
clubbed the two cases and held inquiry and, by judgment dated
08.09.2009, accepted the evidence about negligent driving of the Tata
Tempo being the cause to the accident. The said finding has attained
finality. The tribunal awarded compensation in the total sum of
Rs.12,73,000/- in favour of the first respondent, calculating it thus:-
Sl.No. Head Amount in (Rs.)
1. Medical Treatment 5,000/-
2. Pain and suffering 50,000/-
3. Attendant charges 10,500/-
4. Loss of amenities of life 5,000/-
5. Loss of income/loss of earning 11,92,000/-
capacity/permanent disability
6. Conveyance 5,000/-
7. Special diet 5,000/-
Total 12,72,500-
Rounded off to 12,73,000/-
2. The insurer on which the liability to pay has been fastened has
come up questioning the above mentioned award in the context of loss
of earning capacity due to permanent disability, on the basis of
assessment of the tribunal, that the claimant had suffered one hundred
per cent (100%) functional disability.
3. It is noted that the injuries suffered by the appellant included
both upper limbs crushed with loss of skin and tenderness besides
multiple injuries on other parts of the body. The injuries to the upper
limbs have rendered him permanently disabled, his functional
disability assessed (Ex.PW-6/A) by board of doctors to be fifty two
per cent (52%), this having been proved by Dr. Sameer Mehta (PW-6),
who was the member of the said board constituted by the medical
superintendent of Babu Jagjivan Ram Hospital, Jahangir Puri, Delhi.
4. The tribunal has noted that the claimant was a driver by
profession and on account of the above mentioned handicap, which is
permanent, he has been rendered jobless as he cannot continue with
the profession of driving motor vehicle, his limbs being not
supportive. In these circumstances, the assessment made by the
tribunal does not call for any interference.
5. The appeal is dismissed.
6. The insurance company had deposited the entire awarded
amount with interest with UCO Bank, Delhi High Court Branch, New
Delhi in terms of order dated 19.02.2010 and from out of such deposit,
sixty per cent (60%) was allowed to be released to the claimant
(respondent no.1) by order dated 30.08.2010. The balance shall also
now be released to the claimant.
7. The statutory amount shall be refunded to the appellant
insurance company.
8. The appeal along with accompanying applications stand
disposed of in above terms.
R.K.GAUBA, J.
SEPTEMBER 08, 2017
vk
