Research › Search › Judgment

Rajasthan High Court · body

2001 DIGILAW 1028 (RAJ)

Vishnu Kumari v. Suresh Kumar

2001-07-06

A.R.LAKSHMANAN, BHAGWATI PRASAD

body2001
JUDGMENT 1. Heard learned counsel Mr. Jagdish Vyas appearing for the appellant and learned counsel Mr. Sanjeev Johari appearing for the Insurance Company. 2. The present appeal has been filed by the claimant not being satisfied with the award passed by the Tribunal and as confirmed by the learned Single Judge. 3. It is stated that the accident occurred on account of rash and. negligent driving of the respondent no. 1, who was driving truck No. HR-26/ 8073 and as a result of this accident, the claimant sustained grievous injuries in both the legs, right arm and on the chest. The claimant also sustained fracture in Tibia and Fibula of right leg. The claimant was operated at Ahmedabad and a metal plate was also inserted in her right leg. There was 52% permanent disability and 3" shortening of her right leg. The claimant filed the claim petition seeking a sum of Rs. 14,43,000/-. She examined two witnesses in support of her claim. No evidence was adduced by the respondent Insurance Company. After the trial, the Tribunal granted a compensation of Rs. 75,000/- and aggrieved against the quantum of compensation, the claimant preferred a Civil Misc. Appeal No. 246/97 which was dismissed by the learned Single Judge on the ground that no medical certificate rather evidence showing the permanent disability was ever issued or filed by the respective Medical Boards and such documents have also not been placed on record. In this view of the matter, the learned Single judge confirmed the award passed by the Tribunal holding that the award of Rs. 75,000/- in all was justified on all the counts. The learned Single Judge dismissed the appeal as according to him, no case was for interference is made out. 4. Learned counsel for the appellant submitted that the quantum fixed by the Tribunal by way of compensation and as confirmed by the learned Single judge was grossly inadequate. According to the counsel for the appellant, it has been satisfactorily proved on record that the claimant has suffered permanent disability and her right leg was shortened by 3" and the claimant sustained fractures in Tibia and Fibula of her right leg. These injuries are well proved on record. 5. According to the counsel for the appellant, it has been satisfactorily proved on record that the claimant has suffered permanent disability and her right leg was shortened by 3" and the claimant sustained fractures in Tibia and Fibula of her right leg. These injuries are well proved on record. 5. When a query was made from learned counsel for the respondent Insurance Company, he answered that there is a medical evidence to show that there was 52% of permanent disability and 3" shortening of right leg of the appellant herein. Unfortunately, the medical evidence, though available, was not made available to the learned Single Judge, which made the learned Single Judge to disbelieve the assertion of the appellant herein. 6. In our opinion, the quantum of the compensation awarded by the Tribunal against the claim made by the appellant is grossly inadequate in the background of facts and circumstances of the case and all the medical evidence available on record. The proof of permanent disability has been placed on record. That apart, the appellant, being a lady, sustained serious bodily pains and mental agony and, therefore, adequate compensation should have been granted by the Tribunal, It is seen from the record that Rs. 50,000/- were claimed by the claimant against the medical expenses and the claimant, in the support of her case, produced medical bills and the bills of expenses incurred in operation etc. only to the extent of Rs. 43,000/-. Since the medical bills itself have been produced to the tune of Rs. 43,000/-, the award of compensation for permanent disability should have been increased by the Tribunal. Since it has been clearly proved that the claimant has suffered permanent disability and that she was 27 years old on the date of accident. We are of the view that the compensation should have been increased by a further sum of Rs. 50,000/- which in our opinion would meet the ends of justice. 7. In our opinion, the compensation awarded as enhanced now by this court is just and reasonable and, therefore, the award passed by the Tribunal and the order passed by the learned Single Judge is modified to the above extent. The claimant will be entitled to interest with 12% p.a. from the date of claim petition till its realisation. The time of payment is three months from today. 8. The claimant will be entitled to interest with 12% p.a. from the date of claim petition till its realisation. The time of payment is three months from today. 8. Accordingly, this appeal is allowed to the above extent.Appeal Allowed to above extent. *******