Research › Search › Judgment

Punjab High Court · body

2006 DIGILAW 4230 (PNJ)

Rakesh Verma v. Gurbachan Singh

2006-10-28

ARVIND KUMAR

body2006
JUDGMENT Arvind Kumar, J. - In this appeal, challenge is to award dated 17.11.1988 passed by the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Chandigarh, awarding, a sum of Rs. 3,63,3000/- as compensation to the claimant (appellant herein) alongwith interest at the rate of 12 per cent per annum from the date of claim petition till payment, on account of injuries sustained by him in a motor vehicle accident that took place on 6.4.1985. 2. In brief, the facts of the case are that on 6.4.1985, claimant Rakesh Verma had gone to Sector 10, Chandigarh on his Hero Majestic moped. When he was returning to his residence in Sector 8 via Sector 9, Chandigarh, a car bearing registration No. PUD-4847, driven by respondent No. 1 Gurbachan Singh came at a fast speed and struck against his moped at the inter-section of roads near U.T. Secretariat Building. As a result of the said accident, claimant- appellant received serious injuries and was rushed to the hospital. His left leg was amputated. Claimant then filed claim petition claiming compensation for the injuries suffered by him in the accident. 3. Upon notice of the claim petition, respondents 1 and 2 filed joint written statement in which they denied the allegation that the accident was caused due to rash and negligent driving of respondent No. 1 Gurbachan Singh. It was rather pleaded by them that the claimant being under the influence of liquor was driving his moped negligently. Respondent No. 3, namely, insurance company also filed its written statement taking therein almost similar pleas as taken by the other respondents. 4. On framing of issues, evidence was led by the parties in respect of their case. 5. The learned Tribunal on appreciation of evidence led before it, allowed the claim petition and granted compensation of Rs. 3,63,000/- to the claimant (appellant herein) alongwith interest at the rate of 12 per cent per annum from the date of claim petition till payment. It was, however, ordered that in case the claimant had received the statutory amount of Rs. 7500/- which was granted to him earlier on account of No Fault Compensation, the same be deducted from the total amount of compensation. Feeling dissatisfied with the quantum of compensation, the claimant has approached this Court by way of present appeal. 6. Learned counsel for the parties have been heard. 7. Appellant-chaimant has sought enhancement of compesation. 7500/- which was granted to him earlier on account of No Fault Compensation, the same be deducted from the total amount of compensation. Feeling dissatisfied with the quantum of compensation, the claimant has approached this Court by way of present appeal. 6. Learned counsel for the parties have been heard. 7. Appellant-chaimant has sought enhancement of compesation. On the contrary, the argument of counsel for the respondents is that keeping in view the value of money at that point of time, the compensation awarded is adequate. Arguments have been scanned. Appellant-claimant is B.Com. and holder of diploma in Hotel Management. He had worked at Hotel Oberoi Towers, Hotel Piccadilly and Hotel Mountview, Chandigarh, for short spell of periods in different capacities as Tr. Front Officer Cashier, Management Trainee and Receptionist respectively. He had also gone abroad for higher training. There is no dispute that he was well-versed in the business of Hotel Management. Ultimately, he was selected for the post of Hotel Manager in Hotel Samrat International, Patna. Appointment letter dated 28.3.1985 (Exhibit P-7) shows that he was to get monthly salary of Rs. 3000/- plus boarding and Rs. 700/- as house rent charges. However, his professional career has been marred on account of the accident which led to amputation of his left leg above knee. The Tribunal while making assessment for the loss of future earnings observed that on account of the said disability, he may not get in top ranking hotels and even with the artificial limb the said disqualification would always be in his way of promotion. Thus, it is not that he will not get employment at all but he may not get front office assignments which are glamorous and are also challenging. In this backdrop of the facts, the learned Tribunal has rightly come to the conclusion that his earnings have been impaired by 50 per cent. Thus, the Tribunal has adequately assessed the loss of future earnings at the rate of Rs. 1500/- per month with multiplier of 16, coming to Rs. 2,88,000/-. His claim for artificial limb from abroad costing Rs. 1,06,000/- and air fare to and fro including boarding and lodging has adequately been dealt with by the Tribunal and rejected. The indigenous artificial limb cannot be said to be not better than foreign made unless there is definite expert opinion. However, no such expert opinion has been brought on record. His claim for artificial limb from abroad costing Rs. 1,06,000/- and air fare to and fro including boarding and lodging has adequately been dealt with by the Tribunal and rejected. The indigenous artificial limb cannot be said to be not better than foreign made unless there is definite expert opinion. However, no such expert opinion has been brought on record. In absence thereof, it has rightly been held by the learned Tribunal that it was not necessary for him to go for a foreign made artificial limb. It, thus, requires no interference. 8. The Tribunal has awarded Rs. 15,000/- on account of expenses on the medical treatment, i.e. hospital charges, medical bills, transport charges, special diet and attendants expenses etc. It has been argued that the expenses were incurred to the tune of Rs. 50,000/-. There is no evidence to substantiate the same. However, it can also not be ignored that the entire bills of expenses are sometimes meticulously not retained. Therefore, giving allowance to the exaggeration, the amount stands enhanced to Rs. 22,000/-, i.e. Rs. 7000/- over and above the one awarded by the Tribunal. 9. Appellant-claimant has suffered amputation of left leg above knee. PW-4 Dr. S.S. Sandhu, an Orthopaedician from P.G.I., Chandigarh, has stated that the same amounts to disability to the extent of 60-65 per cent. The task of assessment of compensation in injury claim cases is very difficult one, in as much as for human suffering resulting from any serious bodily injury cannot from its very nature be valued in terms of money. No amount of compensation can restore the physical frame of the injured. Therefore, while determining the damages, the reasonable compensation with moderation having regard o the awards in comparable cases has to be awarded. Therefore, in backdrop of the injuries, disability, pain and suffering and mental shock, the award of Rs. 30,000/- and on account of loss of enjoyment of life, deprivation of marital bliss the award of Rs. 30,000/- (total Rs. 60,000/-) are certainly on meagre side and thus stand enhanced to Rs. 90,000/- i.e. Rs. 30,000/- over and above the one awarded by the Tribunal. 10. 30,000/- and on account of loss of enjoyment of life, deprivation of marital bliss the award of Rs. 30,000/- (total Rs. 60,000/-) are certainly on meagre side and thus stand enhanced to Rs. 90,000/- i.e. Rs. 30,000/- over and above the one awarded by the Tribunal. 10. Coming to the rate of interest, previously it used to be 12 per cent, however, in the recent years the bank rate have been considerably reduced and the rate of interest is being awarded at the rate of 7-1/2 per cent in view of the judgment of the Supreme Court in Tamil Nadu State Transport Corporation Limited v. S. Rajapriya and others, (2005-2)140 P.L.R. 650 (S.C.). Therefore, in that back-drop of the situation, the enhanced compensation in this case shall carry interest at the flat rate of 9 per cent per annum from the date of filing of the claim petition till its payment. 11. In view of the above, the impugned award stands modified in the manner indicated above. The appeal stands disposed of accordingly. No costs. Order accordingly.