F.A.O.NO. 2553 OF 2003 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH F.A.O.NO. 2553 OF 2003 Date of decision:14th December, 2010 Gollu @ Manoj Kumar son of Shri Ram Lal resident of House No. 1429, Ground Floor, Sector 37-B, Chandigarh. .......Appellant Versus Avtar Singh son of Shri Kaka Singh, resident of House No. 46, Mauli Jagran, U.T., Chandigarh and others. ........Respondents BEFORE: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE K.KANNAN Present: Mr. S.P.Garg, Advocate, for the appellant. None for the respondents. 1. Whether Reporters of local papers may be allowed to see the judgment? Yes/No 2. To be referred to the Reporters or not?Yes/No 3. Whether the judgment should be reported in the Digest? Yes/No K.Kannan, J.(Oral) 1. The appeal is for enhancement of compensation for injuries sustained in a motor accident. The Tribunal had awarded Rs. 7,00,000/- towards compensation for disability that had resulted in complete lack of sensation and paralysis below hip. The evidence was that he can not have any sensation of motion or urine and he could not walk for the rest of his life. The doctor had also opined that he will be confined to bed. The details of injuries suffered in the accident F.A.O.NO. 2553 OF 2003 2 have been brought forth in the doctor's evidence and set out in paragraph 9 of the award of the Tribunal as follows:- “Complete cord transaction from D.12-L.1 was disrupted. Diaphragmatic surface was irregular. Spleen likely to be detected. Splenic fragament or hematoma. Claimant was unable to move both lower limbs. Free fluid was present in morrisons. There was fracture in back bone also. PW.5 Dr. Somasekhara Reddy when appeared in the witness box also stated that the claimant suffering from blunt trauma abdomen with splenic laceration and blunt trauma chest with left haemothorax. The injuries were grievous in nature. There was complete loss of sensation and movement from below limbs. The patient will not able to walk for whole of his life and even can not stand on his legs.” 2. He was a motor mechanic, aged 21 years and the evidence was that he was earning Rs. 4,000/- per month. The Tribunal took the income at Rs. 3,000/- and having regard to the complete loss of earning capacity provided for a multiplier of 16. The learned counsel pleads for enhancement of compensation and I would apply a multiplier of 18 in the manner provided by Sarla Verma Vs. Delhi Transport Corporation and another (2009) 6 SCC 121. The principles of F.A.O.NO. 2553 OF 2003 3 ascertaining compensation for injuries sustained in the accident have been dealt with in detail by the Hon'ble Apex Court in Raj Kumar vs. Ajay Kumar (2010) 12 SCALE 265. The endeavour of the Court shall always be to secure evidence through the doctor as to how the disability impacts the earning capacity. 100% of what has been assessed by the doctor, I would take as having resulted in 100% to be loss of earning capacity as well. The said judgment also gives details as to how even apart from loss of earning capacity the Court shall also factor appropriate the claim for compensation of prospects of marriage and loss of amenities in life, reduction in life expectancy, etc. The Tribunal has not provided for loss of amenities for a person who has been confined to bed, I accord to him Rs. 1,00,000/-. I would also provide for another Rs. 25,000/- for loss of prospect of marriage. The component of attendant charges for a person who is confined to bed for the rest of life has to be suitably compensated. While I retain the transportation expenses I will provide for the attendant charges, average amount of Rs. 1,000/- for the rest of his life and adopt a multiplier of 18 to yield a return which can take care of the attendant charges for rest of his life. The tabulation of compensation for the injuries sustained by the claimant shall be as under:- INJURY CASES Age 21 years Period of hospitalisation 17.05.2000 to 2.07.2000 F.A.O.NO. 2553 OF 2003 4 INJURY CASES Occupation and Income Motor Mechanic Rs. 3,000/- Rs. 3,000/- Heads of claim Tribunal High Court Sr. No. Amount(Rs) Amount(Rs) 1 Loss of Income from to 2 Medical Expenses 25,000/- 25,000/- (i) Medicines (ii) Hospital Charges (iii) Attendant Charges 18,000/- 2,16,000/- 24,000/- 3 Transport 7,000/- 7,000/- 4 Pain & Suffering – per fracture/ per surgery 50,000/- 1,00,000/- 5 Disability 100.00% 100.00% 6 Loss of earning capacity 100.00% 100.00% Income x % of loss of earning power x multiplier 3000 x 12 x 16 x 100% = 5,76,000/- 3000 x 12 x 18 x 100% = 6,48,000/- 7 Reduction in life expectancy/Loss of amenities --- 1,00,000/- 8 Loss of prospect of marriage --- 25,000/- 9 Loss to estate --- -- Total 7,00,000/- 11,45,000/- 3. The amount in excess over what has already been awarded by the Tribunal shall attract interest at 6% from the date of the petition till the date of payment. The Union of India shall be liable to satisfy the claim of the claimants. The appeal is allowed to the above extent only. [K.KANNAN] JUDGE 14th December, 2010 Shivani Kaushik