Punjab-Haryana High Court
Dev Raj vs Gurpreet Singh And Ors on 25 January, 2023
245
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT
CHANDIGARH
FAO-3142-2018 (O&M)
Date of decision : 25.01.2023
Dev Raj ... Appellant(s)
Versus
Gurpreet Singh & Ors. ... Respondent(s)
CORAM : HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE ALKA SARIN
Present : Mr. Rajiv Joshi, Advocate for the appellant.
Mr. Amandeep Chhabra, Advocate for respondent Nos.1 and 2.
Mr. Rajesh Verma, Advocate for respondent No.3.
ALKA SARIN, J. (ORAL)
The present appeal has been preferred by the injured claimant-
appellant against the award dated 15.01.2018 passed by the Motor Accident
Claims Tribunal, Shaheed Bhagat Singh Nagar (hereinafter referred to as
'Tribunal').
The only grievance of the claimant-appellant in the present case
is qua the quantum of compensation awarded by the Tribunal. Since the
factum of the accident and the other facts are not in dispute, the same are not
being reproduced herein for the sake of brevity.
Learned counsel for the claimant-appellant would contend that
the claimant-appellant remained admitted in hospital from 02.07.2015 to
07.10.2015 as per the evidence available on the record. It is further
YOGESH SHARMA
2023.01.27 11:42
I attest to the accuracy and
integrity of this order/judgment.
Chandigarh
FAO-3142-2018 (O&M) -2-
contended that though the disability certificate states the disability of the
claimant-appellant is 75%, however, as per the disability certificate
(Ex.CW4/A), it is a case of "ACUTE SDH LEFT SIDE WITH MULTIPLE
HAEMORRHAGIC CONTUSIONS WITH RIGHT FRONTAL SAH WITH
BLUNT ......". It has further been mentioned that he was operated for "LEFT
FRONTOTEMPOROPARIETAL CRANIOTOMY WITH LAX DUROPLASTY
DONE". The disability certificate itself states that the patient is unconscious,
bedridden and is being fed through a ryles tubes and cannot do his daily
routine activities and needs supportive attendant around him the whole day.
Learned counsel for the claimant-appellant would further contend that the
Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Abhimanyu Partap Singh Vs.
Namita Sekhon & Anr. [2022 (3) RCR (Civil) 557] had assessed the
attendant charges for the injured who is totally confined to the bed as
Rs.5,000/- for his whole life, calculating the compensation applying the
multiplier of '18'. He would further contend that keeping in view the
condition of the claimant-appellant, his disability ought to have been
assessed as 100% and he would be entitled to the attendant charges as
granted in the case of Abhimanyu Partap Singh (supra). Learned counsel
would further contend that the amount awarded towards pain and sufferings
and various other heads are also on the lower side.
Per contra, learned counsel for the respondents have contended
that the disability has been assessed as 75% as per the disability certificate
and there is no reason to assess the disability of the claimant-appellant as
100%. It is further the contention of that keeping in view the age of the
claimant-appellant, multiplier method and future prospects would not be
YOGESH SHARMA
2023.01.27 11:42
I attest to the accuracy and
integrity of this order/judgment.
Chandigarh
FAO-3142-2018 (O&M) -3-
applicable. It is further the contention that there is no scope of enhancement
in the present case.
Heard.
In the present case, the Tribunal has awarded the following
compensation :
Sr. Heads Compensation Awarded
No.
1 Medical expenses (bills/receipts) & Rs.4,10,800/-
permanent disability
2 Other material loss/expenses of Rs.50,000/-
attendant
3 Damages for mental and physical Rs.50,000/-
shock, pain and sufferings already
suffered or likely to be suffered in
future
4 Damages to compensate for the loss Rs.50,000/-
of emanates of life which may
include a variety of matters i.e. on
account of the injury the claimant
may not be able to walk, run or sit
5 Damages for the loss of expectation Rs.50,000/-
of life i.e. on account of injury the
normal longevity of person is
shortened
6 Inconvenience, hardship, discomfort, Rs.50,000/-
disappointment, frustration and
mental stress in life, including
special diet
7 Total Compensation Rs.6,50,800/-
Rounded of to Rs.6.51 Lakhs
Interest 7.5% per annum
In the present case, as per the evidence on the record and as per
the disability certificate, the injured claimant-appellant remained admitted in
hospital from 02.07.2015 to 07.10.2015. As per the disability certificate, the
injured-appellant suffered disability to the extent of 70%, however, it has
YOGESH SHARMA
2023.01.27 11:42
I attest to the accuracy and
integrity of this order/judgment.
Chandigarh
FAO-3142-2018 (O&M) -4-
been noted in the disability certificate that it was a case of "ACUTE SDH
LEFT SIDE WITH MULTIPLE HEMORRHAGIC CONTUSIONS WITH
RIGHT FRONTAL SAH WITH BLUNT ......". It has further been mentioned
that he was operated for "LEFT FRONTOTEMPOROPARIETAL
CRANIOTOMY WITH LAX DUROPLASTY DONE" and that he was in
unconscious state and totally bedridden and was being fed through a Ryles
Tube and cannot do his daily routine activities and needs supportive
attendant around him the whole day. Keeping in view the condition of the
claimant-appellant, his disability ought to be treated as 100%. However,
keeping in view the age of the claimant-appellant, no amount can be
awarded towards future prospects and because the injured is receiving his
pension a multiplier method also cannot be applied. However, the claimant-
appellant would be entitled to the attendant charges since he would require
an attendant for the rest of his life. The attendant charges are assessed as
Rs.6,40,731/- (Rs.7627.75 x 12 x7) i.e. as per the minimum wages prevalent
at that point of time x 12 months x multiplier of '7' as per the law laid down
in the case of Abhimanyu Partap Singh (supra). The claimant-appellant
would also be entitled to an amount of Rs.5,00,000/- towards pain and
suffering and an amount of Rs.5,00,000/- towards loss of amenities of life.
The amount of Rs.4,10,800/- awarded by the Tribunal towards medical
expenses as well as the amount of Rs.50,000/- towards special diet etc. are
maintained. Accordingly, the compensation is re-worked out as under :
Sr. Heads Compensation Awarded
No.
1 Medical Expenses Rs.4,10,800/-
2 Special Diet Rs.50,000/-
YOGESH SHARMA
2023.01.27 11:42
I attest to the accuracy and
integrity of this order/judgment. 3 Attendant Charges Rs.6,40,731/-=(7627.75x12x7)
Chandigarh
FAO-3142-2018 (O&M) -5-
4 Pain and Sufferings Rs.5,00,000/-
5 Loss of amenities of life Rs.5,00,000/-
Total Compensation Rs.21,01,531/-
Amount Awarded by the Tribunal Rs.6,51,000/-
Enhanced amount Rs.14,50,531/-
The enhanced amount shall carry an interest @ 7.5% from the
date of filing of the claim petition till realization.
In view of the above discussion, the present appeal is allowed
and the award passed by the Tribunal is modified accordingly. Pending
applications, if any, also stand disposed off.
25.01.2023 ( ALKA SARIN )
Yogesh Sharma JUDGE
NOTE: Whether speaking/non-speaking: Speaking
Whether reportable: YES/NO
YOGESH SHARMA
2023.01.27 11:42
I attest to the accuracy and
integrity of this order/judgment.
Chandigarh
