1 S.B. Civil Misc. Appeal No.190/2000 Durga Lal @ Durga Das Vs. Deepu Singh and ors. Dated : 22.07.2010 HON'BLE MR. MAHESH BHAGWATI,J. Mr. Sandeep Mathur for the appellant. Mr. Anudyuti Maitra for respondent No.3. *** Challenge in this appeal is to the judgment and award dated 3rd November, 1999 rendered by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Jaipur City, Jaipur whereby the learned Tribunal decreed an amount of Rs.1,25,000/- in favour of the claimant-appellant and against the respondents non-claimants. 2. Being dissatisfied with this amount of compensation, the appellant has implored to enhance the same. 3. Background facts, in a nut shell, are thus: “That on 18th February, 1999 the appellant-claimant along with his one colleague was going on Scooter No.RNI-3883 from his house to his own Tea Stall situated at RIICO, Industrial Area, Sanganer. When he reached at 12 Mile Turn, one Jeep bearing registration No.RJ-01-P-2137 being driven by its driver rashly and negligently at a fast speed, suddenly emerged on wrong side and dashed against the standing Scooter, as a result of which the appellant sustained grievous injuries on his person. The Jeep was being driven by 2 respondent No.1-Deepu Singh and it was registered with United India Insurance Co.Ltd. 4. Heard the learned counsel for the parties and carefully perused the impugned judgment. 5. Learned counsel for the appellant canvassed that the injured Durga Lal sustained grievous injuries on his right leg. This leg was crushed in the said accident and the injuries were taken care of by treating Doctor, but ultimately his right leg was amputated from 2 or 3 inches below knee. The appellant was earning approximately Rs.6,000/- per month and due to amputation of his leg, he could not attend his work for a period of six months. Not only he was deprived from working for a period of more than six months, his efficiency and capacity to work decreased to a get extend because of this accident. The learned Tribunal has awarded an amount of Rs.1,25,000/- only as compensation which is abysmally low in the facts and circumstances of the case. The Hon'ble Apex Court in many such cases passed an award of Rs.3,00,000/-, hence, the amount of compensation in the instant appeal also deserves to be raised. 6. E-contra, the learned counsel for respondent No.3 defended the impugned 3 judgment and stated the same to be just and proper. He canvassed that the learned Tribunal having carefully scrutinized and critically analyzed the evidence led by both the parties, has rightly computed the amount of compensation of Rs.1,25,000/- and it warrants no intervention. 7. In the case of R.D.Hattangadi V.Pest Control(India) Pvt.Ltd., reported in 1995 ACJ 366(SC), the Hon'ble Apex Court laid down as under: “Broadly speaking, while fixing an amount of compensation payable to a victim of an accident, the damages have to be assessed separately as pecuniary damages and special damages. Pecuniary damages are those which the victim has actually incurred and which are capable of being calculated in terms of money; whereas, non-pecuniary damages are those which are incapable of being assessed by arithmetical calculations. In order to appreciate two concepts, pecuniary damages may include expenses incurred by the claimant:(i) medical attendance;(ii) loss of earning of profit up to the date of trial; and (iii) other material loss. So far as non- pecuniary damages are concerned, they may include (i) damages for mental and physical shock, pain and suffering, already suffered or likely to be suffered in future; (ii) damages to compensate for the loss of amenities of life which may include a variety of matters, i.e., on account of injury the claimant may not be able to walk, run or sit; (iii) damages for the loss of expectation 4 of life, i.e. on account of injury the normal longevity of the person concerned is shortened; and (iv) inconvenience, hardship, discomfort, disappointment, frustration and mental stress in life. 8. In the case of Dr. Gop Ramchandani Vs. Onkar Singh reported in 1993 ACJ 577(Rajasthan), this Court has awarded a compensation of Rs.1,00,000/- on account of the non-pecuniary special damages, when there was 50 per cent permanent disablement and there was amputation of one leg. 9. In the instant case, the injured Durga Lal @ Durga Das was of the age of 30 years at the time of accident. The learned Tribunal found that he was earning Rs.3,000/- per month. He could not work for a long time and thus, he was deprived of earning his livelihood for a period of six months. The injury report Ex.10, X-ray report Ex.11 and discharge ticket Ex.67 reveal that he sustained two grievous injuries in the said accident and there were multiple fractures on the right leg. The right leg was amputated two or three inches below from the knee. The learned Tribunal awarded one lac rupee compensation towards physical pain, trauma and injuries etc. Apart this, the learned Tribunal assessed separately Rs.25,000/- to be the pecuniary damages. Hence, on the analogy of the decision of 5 Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of R.D. Hattangadi V. Pest Control (India) Pvt. Ltd., (Supra), I deem just and proper to enhance the amount from Rs.1,00,000/- (Rs.one lac) to Rs.2,00,000/- (Rs. Two lacs) on account of non-pecuniary special damages. In the case of Jitendra Singh Vs. Islam and others reported in 1998 ACJ 1301 (Rajasthan) this court awarded compensation of Rs.2,00,000/- in the case of amputation of one leg. Therefore, non- pecuniary special damages of Rs.2,00,000/- is awardable in the present case on hand. So far as the pecuniary damages are concerned, the learned Tribunal has assessed Rs.25,000/-, which does not require any intervention. Therefore, the total amount of compensation awardable in the instant case is Rs.2,00,000/- + Rs.25,000/- =Rs.2,25,000/-. The award of the learned Trial Court is required to be enhanced accordingly. 10. For the reasons stated above, the appeal is allowed and the appellant- claimant is held entitled to claim Rs.2,25,000/- from the respondent-non- claimant No.1 to 3 jointly and severally. 11. The appellant-claimant shall also be entitled to get interest @ 6% per annum on the enhanced amount from the date of filing the claim petition, till 6 it is actually realized. Rest of the terms under the award shall remain unchanged. 12. The impugned award stands modified as indicated hereinabove. 13. There shall be no order as to costs. (MAHESH BHAGWATI)J. Pcg