Research › Search › Judgment

Rajasthan High Court · body

2004 DIGILAW 1744 (RAJ)

Kumari Sapna v. Ramchandra

2004-12-06

DALIP SINGH

body2004
JUDGMENT 1. - This appeal has been filed against the award dated 4.10.1993 passed by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Jaipur (hereinafter referred to as 'the Tribunal') in Claim Petition No. 364/1993 (76/1990) filed by the appellant for compensation on account of their injuries suffered by the appellant in an accident. 2. The brief facts giving rise to this appeal are that the appellant was travelling with her family members in a Matador bearing Registration No. RSN 7192 and they were going to Nainital from Jodhpur via Jaipur and when the said vehicle reached near village Kanaota on the National Highway No. 11, met with an accident with a Truck bearing No. RNV 7866 which was coming from the opposite direction which was rashly and negligently driven by driver Ramchandra the respondent No. 1. The said Truck was owned by respondent No. 2 and insured by the respondent No. As a result of the said injuries, a claim petition was filed before the Tribunal and the Tribunal awarded an amount of Rs. 35,000/- as compensation to the claimant-appellant. 3. The submissions of the learned Counsel for the appellant is that the appellant suffered fracture on both the legs. The age of the appellant at the time of accident was seven to eight years and was operated upon and remained in bed for a period about six months. On account of the said injuries, the appellant was unable to continue with her studies and lost one academic year. The further submission of the learned Counsel for the appellant is that the appellant had sustained a limp on the legs and the marriage prospects of the appellant have also been diminished. Consequently, learned Counsel for the appellant submits that the amount of Rs. 25,000/- was awarded for the injuries and amount of Rs. 10,000/- was awarded for the treatment and under the head of pain and suffering and the total of which comes to Rs. 35,000/- which is wholly inadequate in the facts and circumstances of this case. 4. On the other hand, learned Counsel for the respondents submits that no direct evidence has been led for the expenses of actual treatment and the amount awarded in the case of the appellant is reasonable. 5. 35,000/- which is wholly inadequate in the facts and circumstances of this case. 4. On the other hand, learned Counsel for the respondents submits that no direct evidence has been led for the expenses of actual treatment and the amount awarded in the case of the appellant is reasonable. 5. Having considered the submissions made at the bar and perusing the record, I am of the view that in the cases of injuries, the compensation deserves to be enhanced, considering the facts and circumstances of the present case in a more liberal manner and also the fact that at the time of accident the age of the appellant was 7 to 8 years and the trauma which she suffered as a result of the said accident cannot be visualised adequately and be computed in by awarding a meagre amount of Rs. 10,000/- under the head of pain and suffering along with the medical expenses, the two deserve to be bifurcated. Even though, no account of actual expenses was submitted but the Tribunal, in fact, has awarded compensation for the medical expenses incurred. Assuming that the medical expenses were Rs. 5,000/- in the case of the appellant who sustained two fractures and remained under treatment for a long period, the amount of Rs. 5,000/- under the head of pain and suffering does not meet the requirements in this case. Consequently, the same deserves to be enhanced adequately. The ends of justice would be met if the amount of Rs. 25,000/- is awarded under the head of pain and suffering. Thus compensation awarded for medical expenses is Rs. 5,000/- (Rs. five thousand only) and for pain and suffering Rs. 25,000/- (Rs. twenty five thousand only). Since Rs. 10,000/- (Rs. ten thousand only) has been paid under the impugned award, the appellant would be entitled to Rs. 20,000/- (Rs. twenty thousand only). 6. In the instant case, the appellant had to lose one academic year as has been deposed by A.W. 6 Daulat Ram. It has also come in the evidence of A.W. 6 that the appellant has suffered a permanent limp on account of the fracture of right leg. Even though, in the case of a young children, the healing process is quicker, it has come in the evidence that the appellant has to remain in bed for about 6 months. It has also come in the evidence of A.W. 6 that the appellant has suffered a permanent limp on account of the fracture of right leg. Even though, in the case of a young children, the healing process is quicker, it has come in the evidence that the appellant has to remain in bed for about 6 months. The occurrence of permanent limp would certainly hamper the marriage prospects of a young girl and cannot be lost sight in the present case. In this light of the matter, I deem it reasonable to enhance the amount of the award for the injuries suffered by the appellant from Rs. 25,000/- (Rs. twenty-five thousand only) to Rs. 45,000/- (Rs. forty-five thousand only). Thus, for injuries suffered, the appellant shall be entitled to receive enhanced amount of Rs. 20,000/- (Rs. twenty thousand only) in addition to the amount of Rs. 25,000/- (Rs. twenty five thousand only) which was awarded under the impugned award. 7. Consequently, the appeal is allowed. The amount of compensation is enhanced from by Rs. 35,000/- to and additional amount of Rs. 40,000/-, i.e., Rs. 20,000/- for medical expenses, pain and suffering plus Rs. 20,000/- for the injuries suffered in all Rs. 40,000/- (Rs. forty thousand only). The respondents would pay the amount of Rs. 40,000/- to the appellant by way of demand draft/crossed cheque or deposit with the Tribunal alongwith the interest @ 6% per annum within a period of three months from today w.e.f. the date of filing of the appeal i.e., 11.1.1994. However, in case, the respondents fail to pay or deposit the amount within the stipulated period of three months, the appellant shall recover the amount along with interest @ 9% per annum w.e.f. the date of filing of the claim petition i.e., 1.11.1989.The parties shall bear their own costs.Appeal allowed. *******