Tripura High Court
The Reliance General Insurance ... vs Smti. Richi Pal on 4 February, 2021
Page 1 of 4
HIGH COURT OF TRIPURA
AGARTALA
MAC APP. No.25/2019
The Reliance General Insurance Company Ltd., represented by its Branch
Manager, 570, Nigaum Cross, Next to Royal Industrial Estate, Wadala (W),
Mumbai-400031.
----Appellant(s)
Versus
1. Smti. Richi Pal, D/O. Sri Tapas Kumar Pal, Resident of Joynagar,
Dashamighat, P.S.-West Agartala, District-Tripura West.
2. Mr. Karthick M, S/O. P. Manickam, 5/3 Ariyappa Chettiar Street, P.O.-
Kalappanaicken Patty, Chennai.
3. Mr. Chinnappan K, S/O. Kannusamy, Resident of 14 P.V. Koil Street,
Madipakkam (Good luck DS CH 61), Chennai.
-----Respondent(s)
For Appellant(s) : Mr. P.K. Ghosh, Advocate.
For Respondent(s) : Mr. Paramartha Datta, Advocate,
Mr. Tanmay Debbarma, Advocate.
HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE MR. AKIL KURESHI
Date of hearing and judgment : 4th February, 2021.
Whether fit for reporting : NO.
JUDGMENT & ORDER (ORAL)
This appeal is filed by the insurance company to challenge the
judgment of the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, West Tripura, Agartala
dated 04.04.2018 in case No. T.S. (MAC) 304 of 2013.
2. Brief facts are as under:
On 15.10.2012 the respondent original claimant Smt. Richi Pal
was standing on a roadside near the University campus in the evening at
about 6-15 p.m. when a lorry coming at a high speed collided with her
causing serious bodily injuries. Claimant Richi Pal was aged about 17 years.
She was pursuing her studies in Diploma in Engineering. She had to
undertake extensive medical treatment as an indoor and outdoor patient. The
discharge summary of the treating hospital indicated that she had sustained
"severe crush degloving injuries in her both lower limbs, fracture shaft of
femur right with open knee joint injury, fracture dislocation of left ankle
with avulsion fracture of lateral malleolus including head injury". The right
leg of the claimant had to be amputated from below the knee joint. Extensive
skin grafting had to be done. She had presented bills and vouchers of
medical treatment of Rs.16,78,682/-.
3. The Claims Tribunal awarded a total compensation of
Rs.21,78,682/- which comprised of Rs.16,78,682/- by way of medical
treatment. The rest Rs.5,00,000/- comprised of Rs.4,00,000/- towards future
loss of earning, Rs.50,000/- towards loss of amenities of life, future
discomfort and loss of marriage prospects and Rs.50,000/- towards pain,
shock and suffering.
4. Insurance Company has challenged this award disputing the
quantum of compensation. Since the reimbursement of medical charges is
based on bills and vouchers produced by the claimant and exhibited by the
Claims Tribunal, the insurance company is not in a position to dislodge the
directions of the Claims Tribunal. With respect to the rest of the payments, I
find that the Claims Tribunal has been rather conservative in awarding the
compensation. The injured was aged 17 years at the time of accident
pursuing her higher education. She thus had a fairly bright career. The
injuries were so serious that she had to undertake extensive medical
treatment and even that was not sufficient. She lost her right leg from below
the knee joint. This would have dramatic impact on her earning ability in
future, would certainly diminish her prospects of enjoying the life to the full
including entering into marriage and leading happy married life. The injury
would certainly result into serious loss of enjoyment of amenities of life as
well as cause tremendous pain, shock and suffering. The Tribunal has
without any bifurcation or computation, awarded what I consider it to be a
rather modest sum of Rs.4,00,000/- towards future loss of income. Merely
because the injured was a student at the time of the accident, would not
prevent the Claims Tribunal from assessing possible loss of future income.
Even the compensation towards pain, shock and suffering and loss of
amenities of life is, if at all extremely low.
5. No case for interference is made out. Appeal of the insurance
company is dismissed.
6. Pending application(s), if any, also stands disposed of.
Records and proceedings be transmitted to the concerned
Claims Tribunal.
(AKIL KURESHI), CJ
Pulak
