Research › Search › Judgment

Rajasthan High Court · body

2018 DIGILAW 1162 (RAJ)

Moolchand v. Gopal Lal Meena

2018-05-03

SABINA

body2018
JUDGMENT 1. Appellant has filed this appeal, challenging the award dated 18.4.2013 passed by the Tribunal, seeking enhancement of compensation. 2. Learned counsel for the appellant has submitted that as per Ex.115 appellant had suffered permanent disability to the extent of 70%. However, Tribunal has not granted any compensation to the appellant vis-a-vis permanent disability suffered by him. Compensation granted by the Tribunal under the other heads was also inadequate. 3. Learned counsel for respondent No.3 has opposed the appeal. 4. Appellant had filed the claim petition seeking compensation on account of injuries suffered by him in the motor vehicle accident which had occurred on 5.1.2008. As per Ex.116, net payable salary of the appellant was Rs. 14,686. Appellant was an employee under Department of Posts. As per Ex. 115 appellant had suffered permanent disability to the extent of 70%. Appellant had suffered amputation of right leg. Appellant was aged 60 years at the time of accident. Hence, the appropriate multiplier to work out the amount of compensation vis-a-vis disability suffered by the appellant would be 9. Thus, the appellant is entitled to received Rs. 14,686 x 12 x 9 x 70% = Rs. 11, 10,261/- by way of compensation vis-a-vis disability suffered by him. Appellant would be further entitled to receive an addition of 15% of the said amount towards loss of future prospects and the said amount comes to Rs. 1,66,539/-. 5. Learned counsel for the appellant has submitted that sum total of the medical bills proved on record comes to Rs. 21,516/-. The said calculation has not been disputed by the learned counsel for respondent No.3. Appellant had remained admitted in the hospital for 31 days. Hence, the appellant would be entitled to receive Rs. 15,500/- towards hospital expenses. 6. Appellant has been rightly granted Rs. 2,000/- towards transport expenses by the Tribunal. Amount of compensation granted by the Tribunal under the head of pain and suffering to the tune of Rs. 3,000/- is on a lower side. Appellant would be entitled to receive Rs. 1,00,000/towards pain and suffering. 7. Appellant is also entitled to receive Rs. 15,000/towards special diet. Thus, the appellant is entitled to receive, in all, Rs. 11, 10,261/- + Rs. 1, 66,539 + Rs. 21,516, + Rs. 15,500/- + Rs. 2,000/- + Rs. 1,00,000/- + Rs. 15,000/-= Rs. 14,30,816/-. 8. Accordingly, this appeal is allowed. 1,00,000/towards pain and suffering. 7. Appellant is also entitled to receive Rs. 15,000/towards special diet. Thus, the appellant is entitled to receive, in all, Rs. 11, 10,261/- + Rs. 1, 66,539 + Rs. 21,516, + Rs. 15,500/- + Rs. 2,000/- + Rs. 1,00,000/- + Rs. 15,000/-= Rs. 14,30,816/-. 8. Accordingly, this appeal is allowed. Impugned award dated 18.4.2013 is modified to the extent that appellant would be entitled to receive Rs. 14,30,816/- by way of compensation instead of Rs. 1,08,746/- awarded by the Tribunal. Other terms and conditions of the award shall remain unchanged. It is further ordered that the enhanced amount of compensation be invested in Fixed Deposit Receipts with a nationalised Bank initially, for a period of three years and the interest accrued upon the deposit shall be paid to the appellant on monthly basis. The Secretary District Legal Services Authority, Sawaimadhopur shall invest the amount in F.D.R. in the name of the appellant in some nationalised Bank. The Secretary, District Legal Services Authority, Sawaimadhopur shall apprise the appellant regarding the amount which has been granted to him by way of enhancement and the factthat the enhanced amount shall be invested in F.D.R. in some nationalised bank for his benefit.