Delhi High Court
Sharad Singh vs H.D. Narang & Anr. on 15 September, 2017
$~12
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
Decided on: 15th September, 2017
+ MAC.APP. 221/2009
SHARAD SINGH ..... Appellant
Through: Mr. Sagar Saxena, Advocate with
Ms. Himanshi Saini, Adv. &
Mr. Ralu Kumar, Adv.
versus
H.D. NARANG & ANR. ..... Respondents
Through: Ms. Neerja Sachdeva, Advocate
for R-2.
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE R.K.GAUBA
JUDGMENT (ORAL)
1. The appellant herein was a young person, aged about 20 years,
when he suffered injuries in a motor vehicular accident that occurred
on 29.08.2001 due to negligent driving of car bearing registration
No.HR-26-C-7174 by the first respondent, it admittedly being insured
against third party risk with the second respondent. He instituted
accident claim case (Petition No.459/2008) on 09.08.2002 seeking
compensation under Section 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988.
The tribunal held inquiry and, by judgment dated 29.01.2009, found
that the appellant had brought home his case for compensation on fault
liability. The Tribunal concluded, on the basis of evidence led, that the
claimant had suffered injuries which have rendered him disabled
permanently, his functional disability having been assessed to be
100%. The tribunal determined the compensation in the total sum of
Rs.18,03,512/-, it inclusive of Rs.10,22,356/- towards actual medical
expenses incurred, Rs.6,81,156/- towards consequent loss of earnings
due to disability and Rs.1,00,000/- on account of pain and suffering.
The liability to pay was fastened on the insurer with interest @ nine
per cent (9%) per annum.
2. Aggrieved with the aforesaid determination of compensation,
the present appeal was filed to seek enhancement.
3. At the hearing, it is submitted that the tribunal had not correctly
assessed the probable income of the claimant ignoring the fact that he
had been enrolled with Institute of Chartered Accountants of India for
the course leading to the award of certificate of Chartered
Accountancy. It is submitted that given the nature of injuries and the
disability suffered in the consequence, the tribunal should have taken
care of the future needs of not only treatment but also the regular
services of a regular attendant. It is also the submission of the
appellant that he was a bachelor and the disability has rendered him
with loss of marriage prospect and amenities of life, he also being
entitled to suitable compensation not only on such account but also for
disfigurement, since he is now bedridden and dependant on assistance.
The claimant also seeks enhancement of compensation for pain and
suffering which in his case would be lifelong.
4. It is noted that the claimant had proved, inter alia, by disability
certificate dated 13.12.2005 (Ex.PW-4/9) issued by a board of doctors
of All India Institute of Medical Sciences (AIIMS) that he is a case of
fracture of C4-5 with quadriplegia besides fracture of shaft of right
femur bone and head injury. The certificate confirms that he is
physically handicapped, the physical impairment being permanent and
100% in relation to the whole body.
5. It may be that the appellant had enrolled with Institute of
Chartered Accountants of India. But, the fact remains that he was yet
to study for the certificate that would lead him to eventually become a
Chartered Accountant. Life is full of uncertainties and imponderables.
In the given fact-situation, the approach of the tribunal in going by the
notional income equivalent to the minimum wages payable to a
graduate cannot be faulted. However, it is noted that the tribunal
committed two errors; one, it adopted the wages of Rs.3339/- which
had been actually revised to Rs.3352/- for the period in question and,
the second, that the multiplier of 18 should have been invoked. The
loss of earning due to disability is, thus, re-computed as (3352/- x 12 x
18) Rs.7,24,032/-.
6. The submission of the appellant that he would need the services
of an attendant on account of his medical state, deserves to be
accepted. In a similarly placed case, though of spastic quadriparesis in
which accident had occurred on 02.05.2004, the Supreme Court in
case reported as Kavita vs. Deepak & Ors., (2012) 8 SCC 604, had
awarded Rs.6,00,000/- towards attendant charges, this, besides
Rs.3,00,000/- each on account of loss of amenities of life and
Rs.3,00,000/- towards pain and agony. This case deserves similar
awards. In addition, Rs.1,00,000/- each towards loss of marriage
prospects and disfigurement are added.
7. The medical expenditure of Rs.10,22,356/-, as included in the
dispensation by the tribunal was of actual expenditure incurred till
date of the completion of the inquiry. It is not difficult to imagine that
in such like cases the need for medical assistance would continue
throughout the remainder of life of the claimant. Though formal proof
of the expenditure incurred after the conclusion of the inquiry has not
been mustered, lump-sum amount may be added so that a corpus is
created to take care of all medical needs post the decision. In this
view, Rs.1,00,000/- is added towards future medical bills.
8. Adding Rs.10,22,356/- proved before the tribunal as the medical
expenditure already incurred till such stage, with the above
components, the total compensation in the case comes to (10,22,356/-
+ 7,24,032/- + 6,00,000/- + 3,00,000/- + 3,00,000/- + 1,00,000/- +
1,00,000/- + 1,00,000/-) Rs.32,46,388/-, rounded off to Rs.32,47,000/-
(Rupees Thirty Two Lakh Forty Seven Thousand Only).
9. The award is modified accordingly. Needless to add, it shall
carry interest as levied by the tribunal.
10. The entire enhanced portion of the award shall be paid by the
second respondent (insurer) with up-to-date interest by requisite
deposit with the tribunal within thirty days. Upon such deposit being
made, the tribunal shall release it to the appellant in the form of fixed
deposit interest bearing receipt, to be taken out from a nationalized
bank for a period of ten years with right to draw periodic interest.
11. The appeal stands disposed of in above terms.
R.K.GAUBA, J.
SEPTEMBER 15, 2017
vk
