Research › Search › Judgment

Madhya Pradesh High Court · body

2012 DIGILAW 786 (MP)

Kuldeep Singh v. C. Chainnamal

2012-08-07

N.K.MODY

body2012
JUDGMENT : N.K. Mody, J. Being aggrieved by the award dated 5.5.2009 in Claim Case No. 187 of 2009 passed by Fifth M.A.C.T., Indore whereby learned Tribunal awarded a total sum of Rs. 3,16,000 with interest to the claimant by way of compensation for the injury which he sustained in an accident, the claimant has filed this appeal for enhancement of the compensation. According to claimant, i.e., appellant herein, the compensation awarded is on lower side and hence, needs to be enhanced. So the question that arises for consideration is whether any case for enhancement in compensation awarded by the Tribunal on the facts/evidence adduced is made out in the compensation awarded and, if so, to what extent? It is not necessary to narrate the entire facts in detail, such as how the accident occurred, who was negligent in driving the offending vehicle, who is liable for paying compensation, etc. It is for the reason that, firstly, all these findings are recorded in favour of claimant by the Tribunal. Secondly, none of these findings though recorded in claimant's favour are under challenge at the instance of any of the respondents such as owner/driver or the insurance company either by way of cross-appeal or cross-objection. In this view of the matter, there is no justification to burden the judgment by detailing facts on all these issues. 2. Learned counsel for the appellant submits that in a motor accident which took place on 5.5.2006 appellant sustained injuries. It is submitted that the learned Tribunal awarded a sum of Rs. 3,16,000 break-up of which is as under : 3. The learned counsel submits that in a motor accident which took place on 5.5.2006 appellant was hospitalised for a period of 11 days where the appellant lost both the legs, out of which one was amputated from above knee and second was amputated from below knee. It is submitted that permanent disability assessed is at 50 per cent without taking into consideration the income, amount of compensation was assessed on account of permanent disability. It is submitted that on a number of heads no amount has been awarded and on a number of heads the amount awarded by the learned Tribunal is on lower side. It is submitted that permanent disability assessed is at 50 per cent without taking into consideration the income, amount of compensation was assessed on account of permanent disability. It is submitted that on a number of heads no amount has been awarded and on a number of heads the amount awarded by the learned Tribunal is on lower side. It is submitted that looking to the injuries sustained by the appellant, amount awarded by the learned Tribunal is grossly inadequate which deserves to be enhanced by allowing the appeal filed by the appellant. 4. Learned counsel for the respondent No. 2 submits that in the facts and circumstances of the case, looking to the injuries sustained by the appellant the amount awarded by the learned Tribunal is just and proper. It is submitted that appeal filed by the appellant be dismissed. 5. After taking into consideration all the facts and circumstances of the case and keeping in view the injuries sustained by the appellant, this court is of the view that for the purpose of calculation of permanent disability learned Tribunal ought to have taken into consideration the income of the appellant. Since the accident is of the year 2006 and appellant was driver by profession, therefore, income ought to have been Rs. 3,000 per month. Since both the legs of the appellant were amputated and appellant was driver, therefore, permanent disability ought to have been assessed as 100 per cent. Keeping in view the age of appellant who was 47 years at the time of accident multiplier of 13 ought to have been applied. Thus, a case of enhancement is made out. In view of this, the appeal filed by the appellant is allowed and appellant is entitled for the following amount: 6. In other words, the appellant is held entitled for a total sum of Rs. 5,50,000 instead of Rs. 3,16,000 by way of compensation. The enhanced amount of Rs. 2,34,000 shall carry interest at the rate of 8 per cent per annum from the date of application. In other words, the appellant is held entitled for a total sum of Rs. 5,50,000 instead of Rs. 3,16,000 by way of compensation. The enhanced amount of Rs. 2,34,000 shall carry interest at the rate of 8 per cent per annum from the date of application. The enhanced amount shall be deposited by the respondent No. 2, insurance company, with the learned Tribunal and the learned Tribunal is directed to invest 80 per cent of the said amount on long-term fixed deposit in the name of appellant in the nearest nationalised bank in the area where the appellant is residing, with the condition that the bank will not permit any loan or advance. Interest on the said amount shall be credited on monthly basis in S.B. account of appellant, which shall be opened by the appellant from where appellant can withdraw the amount as per needs. However, on an application by the appellant, this condition can be modified by the learned Tribunal in exceptional circumstances, if made out by the appellant. With the aforesaid modifications, the appeal stands disposed of. C.C. as per rules.