Delhi High Court
Suresh Saini vs Manjeet Singh & Ors (M/S L And T ... on 18 October, 2019
KAMLESH KUMAR
04.11.2019 16:15
$~4
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
% Decided on: 18.10.2019
+ MAC.APP. 588/2017
SURESH SAINI ..... Appellant
Through: Mr. Abhijit Kumar Chattopadhyay,
Ms. Swati and Ms. Jyoti, Advocates.
versus
MANJEET SINGH & ORS (M/S L AND T GENERAL
INSURANCE CO LTD) ..... Respondents
Through: Mr. A.K. Soni, Advocate for R-3.
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE NAJMI WAZIRI
NAJMI WAZIRI, J. (Oral)
CM APPL. 24401/2017 (delay of 84 days in filing)
1. This application seeks condonation of delay of 84 days in filing the
appeal.
2. For the reasons mentioned in the application, the delay is condoned.
3. The application stands disposed-off.
MAC.APP. 588/2017
4. This appeal impugns the award of compensation dated 29.11.2016
passed by the learned MACT in Suit No. 3172/16 on the ground that the
appellant, having suffered a fracture in the fifth metatarsal bone of his left
foot, was incapacitated for a period of more than three months, and should
be duly compensated, as his business has suffered due to this incapacitation.
The appellant had filed ITRs of three years showing gross total income of
Rs. 8,74,917/- per annum.
5. The said fracture is not in dispute inasmuch as the learned Tribunal
has noted that the appellant had suffered it. It is understandable that a person
who suffers such an injury in the web of the feet, would necessarily be in
some degree of constant pain, discomfort and inconvenience, since the entire
weight of the body rests upon the feet. Obviously such injured part of the
body would take a longer time to heal. The claimant-appellant is stated to
be 40 years of age, therefore, the injury would take him longer to recuperate
from than, if he was younger. In any case, he would have been disabled for
at least six to seven weeks and would be unable to attend to his work
properly.
6. The appellant is engaged in the business of trade of batteries. The
plaster cast over his fractured foot would ordinarily take four to five weeks
to be removed and for the leg to heal and to be used fully and/or effectively.
In the circumstances, his incapacitation is assessed for six weeks.
7. In the circumstances, the appellant's monthly income would be
computed as Rs. 8,74,917÷12= Rs.72,910/- (monthly income)x1.5months
(six weeks) = Rs. 1,09,365/-. The Court would note that he has been granted
non-pecuniary compensation of only Rs. 25,000/- for his 'pain and
suffering'; looking at the duration of the suffering the same is enhanced to
Rs. 40,000/-. For a person so incapacitated, he would necessarily need a
vehicle to visit the hospital for medical consultation and/or to go to his
office, if and when he would so be able to. Additionally he would require
'special diet' for the period of recuperation. Accordingly, the compensations
towards 'conveyance charges' and 'special diet' are enhanced to Rs.
10,000/- each. The total amount payable shall be as under:
S.No. Particulars Amount
1. Loss of Income Rs. Rs. 1,09,365/-
72,910 (monthly
income) x 1.5
(months)
2. Pain and suffering Rs. 40,000/-
3. Conveyance charges Rs. 10,000/-
4. Special Diet Rs. 10,000/-
5. Medical Treatment Rs. 10,000/-
TOTAL Rs. 1,79,365/-
8. Let the said amount of Rs. 1,79,365/-, alongwith interest @ 9% per
annum from the date of filing of the claim petition till its realization, be
directly paid into the appellant's bank account bearing account no:
0349101010464, Canara Bank, Maharani Bagh, IFSC CNRB0000349,
within four weeks from the date of receipt of copy of this order.
9. The appeal is disposed-off in the above terms.
NAJMI WAZIRI, J
OCTOBER 18, 2019/AB
