Research › Search › Judgment

Punjab High Court · body

2001 DIGILAW 1 (PNJ)

Oriental Insurance Company Limited v. Om Parkash

2001-01-03

R.L.ANAND

body2001
Judgment R. L. Anand, J. 1. Oriental Insurance Co. Ltd. has filed the present appeal and it has been directed against the award dated 12.8.1995 passed by the Motor Accidents claims Tribunal, Karnal, which awarded a sum of Rs.2,11,400 to respondent Om parkash, along with interest at the rate of 12 per cent per annum from the date of filing of the claim petition till recovery. 2. Some facts can be noticed in the following manner; Om Parkash was working as SHO of Police Station, Gharaunda at the relevant time when the accident took place on 16.7.93. He sustained injuries when he was travelling in a jeep which was insured by the appellant. The injured received multiple grievous injuries on various parts of his body including a fracture on his right leg with other lacerated wounds and abrasions. He was aged 46 years at the time of accident, Om Parkash respondent was shifted to Dr. Vijay Guptas Nursing home, Karnal, where he remained admitted as an indoor patient considerably for a long time and then he obtained treatment from that Dr. Vijay Gupta as outdoor patient. He remained admitted as indoor patient from 16.7.93 to 11.8.1993. Criminal case regarding this accident was registered in P. S. City Karnal bearing F. I. R. No.461 dated 16.7.1993 under sections 279, 337 and 338, Indian Penal Code. The claimant filed the claim petition and claimed a compensation to the tune of Rs.8,00,000 and the case set up by him before the Tribunal was that he was very active and well versed in police activities and used to take part in drill, physical training, crossing jumps and obstacles. He was considered to be an ideal officer and it was on account of his hard work and labour that he had been posted as SHO of P. S. Gharaunda but on account of this accident his chance of promotion has been marred. A number of operations were performed on his leg and 90 degree condylar plate with 9 holes was inserted in his leg which was stitched with 40 stitches. He further alleged that during the period of treatment he was unable to answer the call of nature in a proper manner. He was not in a position to move and had to arrange an attendant round the clock to look after him. He further alleged that during the period of treatment he was unable to answer the call of nature in a proper manner. He was not in a position to move and had to arrange an attendant round the clock to look after him. He took costly medicines prescribed by the doctor and he also took rich diet. After the accident he has become a permanently crippled man and is unable to sit, squat, run, climb stairs, move fast, sit cross-legged, pedal a cycle and. drive a vehicle and he has become absolutely incapable of discharging the functions of a senior police officer. The claim petition was filed against the driver, owner and the insurance company. 3. On the pleadings of the parties the following issues were framed: (1) Whether the accident took place on account of negligence on the part of respondent No.1 Prem Chand in driving jeep No. HR 10-6088 and in the accident petitioner received injuries? opp (2) Whether at the time of accident respondent No.1 Prem Chand had no valid driving licence and the vehicle was being driven in violation of terms and conditions of the insurance policy? opr-3 (3) Whether the claim petition is bad on account of non-joinder of necessary parties? OPR-3 (4) How much compensation the claimant is entitled to and from whom? opp (5) Relief. 4. Parties were given the opportunities to lead evidence. Issue No, 1 was decided in favour of claimant and issue No.2 was decided against the respondents. Issue No.3 was also decided against the respondents. Issue No.4 was decided partly in favour of the claimant and compensation of Rs.2,11,400 was awarded by showing the following break up as given in para 20 of the award: " (1) Rs.11,200 on account of charges obtained by Dr, Vijay Gupta. (2) Rs.34,200 on account of expenses on medicines. (3) Rs.41,000 in lieu of earned leave obtained by the claimant after the accident for his treatment during which he remained confined to bed. (4) Rs.1,00,000 on account of loss due to future prospects in career. (5) Rs.10,000 on account of pain and suffering. (6) Rs.5,000 on account of transport. (7) Rs.10,000 on account of special diet and all this makes a total of rs.2,11,400. " 5. (4) Rs.1,00,000 on account of loss due to future prospects in career. (5) Rs.10,000 on account of pain and suffering. (6) Rs.5,000 on account of transport. (7) Rs.10,000 on account of special diet and all this makes a total of rs.2,11,400. " 5. In the relief issue, interest at the rate of 12 per cent per annum from the date of filing of the petition till recovery was also awarded by the Tribunal. Not satisfied with the award of the MACT, the present appeal has been preferred. 6. I have heard Mr. Subhash Goyal, advocate appearing on behalf of the appellant and Mr. Baljinder Singh, advocate appearing on behalf of the respondents. 7. In this appeal, the impugned award has been challenged on a limited aspect: "whether the Tribunal was justified in awarding interest at the rate of 12 per cent on the amount of Rs.1,00,000 which was awarded to the claimant on account of loss due to future prospects in career. The learned counsel for the appellant submitted that this finding of the Tribunal is erroneous. The interest could be awarded by the Tribunal for a vested right and for the vested loss and not for the loss which might occur to the respondent Om Parkash concerning future prospects in career. Though the tribunal had the right to say that the claimant would suffer loss concerning future prospects in career, on account of the injury. " 8. On the contrary, the learned counsel for the respondents submitted that rs.1,00,000 has been awarded to the claimant being the amount of compensation, therefore, the Tribunal was justified in awarding interest at the rate of 12 per cent on this amount. 9. After considering the rival contentions of the parties, this court is of the opinion that the Tribunal was not justified in awarding interest on amount of rs.1,00,000 which was awarded to the claimant on account of loss due to future prospects in career as this amount was to accrue to the claimant with the lapse of time and after the accident and even after the decision of the Tribunal. 10. In this view of the matter, this appeal is partly allowed and it is hereby ordered that the interest shall be calculated at the rate of 12 per cent on Rs.1,11,400 from the date of the filing of the claim petition till payment. 10. In this view of the matter, this appeal is partly allowed and it is hereby ordered that the interest shall be calculated at the rate of 12 per cent on Rs.1,11,400 from the date of the filing of the claim petition till payment. However, it is clarified that the claimant shall get compensation of rs.2,11,400. There shall be no order as to costs. The appell ant shall pay the remaining amount to respondent Om Parkash within one month. Appeal partly allowed.