Full Judgment Text
$~8
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
th
Date of decision: 5 December, 2011
+ MAC APP. 210/2011
PRAHLAD ..... Appellant
Through: Mr. S. N. Parashar, Adv.
Versus
RAMESH KUMAR & ORS. ..... Respondents
Through: Mr. Abhishek Kumar, Adv. for R-3.
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE G.P.MITTAL
J U D G M E N T
G. P. MITTAL, J. (ORAL)
1. The appeal is for enhancement of compensation for the injury
suffered by the Appellant in the motor accident, which took
place on 03.08.2005. The Appellant suffered 20% disability in
respect of his right lower limb. The Tribunal assessed a
compensation of ` 46,862/- towards treatment expenses, `
20,000/- towards pain & suffering, ` 5,000/- towards
conveyance. The Tribunal found that 20% disability with
respect to the left lower limb would be taken as 10% functional
disability. Applying a multiplier of ‘15’ on the assumed income
of ` 6,165/- of an unskilled worker. The Tribunal awarded a
sum of ` 56,970/- for loss of earning capacity.
MAC APP 210/2011 Page 1 of 3
2. The Appellant remained admitted in Safdarjung Hospital from
03.08.2005 to 13.08.2005 and an operation was performed in
the Hospital. The Appellant was readmitted in a private
hospital on 18.08.2005 and was discharged on 21.08.2005.
3. In the claim petition the Appellant stated that he was working as
a washerman and was ironing clothes and earning ` 5,000/-.
Though, no evidence in respect of the deceased’s income was
produced, yet the averments made in para 4, however, were not
denied either specifically or by necessary implication. Thus, it
can be assumed that the Appellant was working as a washerman
and ironing clothes. His earning capacity would definitely be
affected by 20% and the compensation needs to be enhanced
under this head. Apart from the disability certificate the
Appellant also produced two photographs during inquiry before
the Tribunal, which indicate that apart from disfigurement the
Appellant would have difficulty in running and lifting heavy
weights. Some compensation for loss of amenities and
disfigurement ought to have been granted. Considering the
admission of Appellant in two Hospitals and two surgical
operations, the compensation for pain and suffering needs to be
enhanced from ` 20,000/- to ` 30,000/-. I will proceed to
tabulate the compensation under various heads as follows: -
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
th
Date of decision: 5 December, 2011
+ MAC APP. 210/2011
PRAHLAD ..... Appellant
Through: Mr. S. N. Parashar, Adv.
Versus
RAMESH KUMAR & ORS. ..... Respondents
Through: Mr. Abhishek Kumar, Adv. for R-3.
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE G.P.MITTAL
J U D G M E N T
G. P. MITTAL, J. (ORAL)
1. The appeal is for enhancement of compensation for the injury
suffered by the Appellant in the motor accident, which took
place on 03.08.2005. The Appellant suffered 20% disability in
respect of his right lower limb. The Tribunal assessed a
compensation of ` 46,862/- towards treatment expenses, `
20,000/- towards pain & suffering, ` 5,000/- towards
conveyance. The Tribunal found that 20% disability with
respect to the left lower limb would be taken as 10% functional
disability. Applying a multiplier of ‘15’ on the assumed income
of ` 6,165/- of an unskilled worker. The Tribunal awarded a
sum of ` 56,970/- for loss of earning capacity.
MAC APP 210/2011 Page 1 of 3
2. The Appellant remained admitted in Safdarjung Hospital from
03.08.2005 to 13.08.2005 and an operation was performed in
the Hospital. The Appellant was readmitted in a private
hospital on 18.08.2005 and was discharged on 21.08.2005.
3. In the claim petition the Appellant stated that he was working as
a washerman and was ironing clothes and earning ` 5,000/-.
Though, no evidence in respect of the deceased’s income was
produced, yet the averments made in para 4, however, were not
denied either specifically or by necessary implication. Thus, it
can be assumed that the Appellant was working as a washerman
and ironing clothes. His earning capacity would definitely be
affected by 20% and the compensation needs to be enhanced
under this head. Apart from the disability certificate the
Appellant also produced two photographs during inquiry before
the Tribunal, which indicate that apart from disfigurement the
Appellant would have difficulty in running and lifting heavy
weights. Some compensation for loss of amenities and
disfigurement ought to have been granted. Considering the
admission of Appellant in two Hospitals and two surgical
operations, the compensation for pain and suffering needs to be
enhanced from ` 20,000/- to ` 30,000/-. I will proceed to
tabulate the compensation under various heads as follows: -
| Sl.<br>No. | Head of<br>Compensation | Compensation<br>granted by the<br>Tribunal | Compensation<br>granted by High<br>Court |
|---|
MAC APP 210/2011 Page 2 of 3
| 1. | Treatment expenses | ` 46,862/- | ` 46,862/- |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2. | Pain & Suffering | ` 20,000/- | ` 30,000/- |
| 3. | Special diet &<br>conveyance | ` 5,000/- | ` 5,000/- |
| 4. | Loss of amenities | ` 50,000/- | |
| 5. | Loss of earning<br>capacity | ` 56,970/- | ` 1,13,940/- |
| Total | ` 1,28,832/- | ` 2,45,802/- |
4. There is overall enhancement of ` 1,16,970/-, which shall carry
interest @ 7.5% per annum from the date of filing of the
petition till the payment. Respondent No.3 New India
Assurance Co. Ltd. is directed to deposit the enhanced
compensation with UCO Bank, Delhi High Court Branch, New
Delhi within six weeks. 25% of the amount along with interest
shall be transferred in the Appellant’s savings bank account,
which he can withdraw at his will. Rest of the amount shall be
held in the form of FDR for a period of 3 years. A copy of this
order be communicated to UCO Bank, Delhi High Court
Branch, New Delhi.
5. The appeal is allowed in above terms.
(G.P. MITTAL)
JUDGE
DECEMBER 5, 2011
hs
MAC APP 210/2011 Page 3 of 3