Research › Search › Judgment

Punjab High Court · body

2003 DIGILAW 501 (PNJ)

Vinod Kumar v. Punjab State

2003-04-04

HARJIT SINGH BEDI

body2003
JUDGMENT H.S. Bedi, J. - This set of four appeals arises out of an accident, which took place at about 10.00 A.M. on 24.9.1984 near the over bridge of village Ladhowal on the G.T. Road in District Ludhiana involving bus No. PJG-704 being driven by respondent No. 4 (Subhash Chand) and Car No. PUO-1959, make Ambassador, in which Raj Rani, Vinod Kumar, Janak Raj and Shama Arora were travelling and was being driven by Balwinder Singh. In the said accident three persons i.e., Vinod Kumar, Janak Raj, Raj Rani sustained injuries whereas Shama Arora wife of Vinod Kumar, was killed. Four claim petitions were thereafter filed and the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Ludhiana vide its award dated 20.5.1986 awarded a sum of Rs. 15,000/- each to Vinod Kumar and Janak Raj, claimants for the injuries suffered by them in the accident whereas a sum of Rs. 10,000/- was awarded to Raj Rani, claimant, for the injuries sustained by her. A sum of Rs. 40,000/- was awarded to Vinod Kumar, Master Sumir and Miss Poorti for the death of Shama Arora. Interest at the rate of 9% per annum was also awarded by the Tribunal on the amount of compensation from the date of filing of the claim petition till its realisation. 2. Aggrieved by the award, the claimants have filed the present appeals. 3. The Tribunal has held that the accident had happened on account of the rash and negligent driving of Subhash Chand (respondent No. 4) the driver of the Punjab Roadways Bus, which was involved in the accident. 4. As the State of Punjab has not filed any appeal, the negligence on the part of Subhash Chand, the driver of the offending bus, and the vicarious liability of the State of Punjab is confirmed. 5. I have gone through the award of the Tribunal with regard to the quantum of compensation. 6. Dr. Harjit Singh, PW-5 examined Vinod Kumar, appellant, and found that he had suffered a lacerated wound 3" long on the left side of his forehead and which was muscle deep and bleeding, a lacerated wound each on the lateral border of left eye and on the root of the nose although there was no facial fracture thereunder. The Tribunal also accepted the opinion of the Doctor that the stitches affixed on account of the injuries would leave a permanent disfiguration. The Tribunal also accepted the opinion of the Doctor that the stitches affixed on account of the injuries would leave a permanent disfiguration. To my mind, therefore, a sum of Rs. 15,000/- awarded by the Tribunal is on the lower side. The same is increased to Rs. 25,000/-. 7. The Tribunal has also awarded a sum of Rs. 15,000/- as compensation to Janak Raj, claimant. Janak Raj had not been examined by any doctor but he stated that he had sustained injuries on his forehead, right arm and on his back. The Tribunal has accepted the evidence of Vinod Kumar (PW-6), who stated that his father Janak Raj had suffered a fracture of the right arm and remained under plaster. I am, however, of the opinion that no increase in compensation for his injuries is called for as there is no conclusive evidence to show that he had suffered the fracture and if so whether it was on account of the accident. The case of Raj Rani must now be considered. 8. Raj Rani had been examined by Dr. Harjit Singh (PW-5), who found a lacerated wound 6 cms. long over the left side of her forehead, which was muscle deep along with a cut 1 cm long below the right eyelid. The doctor also opined that the injury was grievous in nature as it had led to permanent disfiguration. Janak Raj, husband of Raj Rani, appeared as the attorney of his wife and stated that she had suffered serious injuries in the accident which included a fracture, which had made it difficult for her to do any domestic work. I am of the opinion that the statement of Janak Raj is at variance with that of Dr. Harjit Singh, who had clearly stated that Raj Rani, had suffered primarily one lacerated wound 6 cms. long over the left side of the forehead. No increase in compensation is, therefore, called for. 9. To my mind, however, the compensation awarded with regard to the death of Shama Arora is wholly inadequate. It is the conceded position that she was the wife of Vinod Kumar and was 29 years of age at the time of her death. In addition to her husband, she left behind two children, namely, Sumir and Poorti, aged 11 and 7 years respectively. It is the conceded position that she was the wife of Vinod Kumar and was 29 years of age at the time of her death. In addition to her husband, she left behind two children, namely, Sumir and Poorti, aged 11 and 7 years respectively. The Tribunal has found that as Raj Rani, the grand mother of the children, could not look after the children on account of her injuries, the services of a maid servant were required. The Tribunal has, thus, assessed the income of the deceased which would fall to her legal heirs at Rs. 3600/- per annum and by applying a multiplier of 10, has assessed the compensation at Rs. 36,000/-. A sum of Rs. 4000/- was also awarded as medical expenses that might have been spent on her treatment. 10. I am of the view that this amount is wholly inadequate as nothing had been granted to the family on account of loss that the children would have suffered on account of death of their mother. Although it is difficult to put an accurate or specific money value on this relationship, yet I am of the opinion that a sum of Rs. 60,000/- in all ought to have been awarded as compensation with respect to the death of Shama Arora under all heads put together. For the foregoing reasons, FAO Nos. 759 and 761 of 1986 are allowed whereas FAO Nos. 760 and 762 of 1986 are dismissed. Appeals allowed.