1 D.B. CIVIL SPECIAL APPEAL NO. 25/2003 (Amba Lal Vs. New India Assurance Co. Ltd.) 6.4.2007 HON'BLE MR JUSTICE RAJESH BALIA HON'BLE MR JUSTICE BHANWAROO KHAN Mr. Ravi Bhansali, for the appellant. Mr. Anil Bachawat, for the respondent. Heard learned counsel for the parties. The preparation of paper-book is dispensed with as in our opinion the appeal can be decided on existing material. The appellant met with an accident on 26.10.1997 while he was going on scooter. He was hit by jeep. In the claim petition factum of accident was proved. The Driver took the plea that the injured himself was responsible for the accident or at best he was responsible for contributory negligence in causing the accident. The appellant has pleaded that the accident was caused due to sole responsibility of the negligent driving of respondent No.2 due to which he suffered 53% disability in right leg. The Motor Accident Claims Tribunal found that the appellant has suffered 53% permanent 2 disablement of right leg. However, he found the appellant to be contributory negligent in causing accident and estimated the contributory negligence at 60%. The only reason assigned by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal was on the basis of the statement of the appellant himself from which his admission about the contributory negligence was assumed and about the site plan about the place of occurrence which was found to be not an official document. The amount of compensation for the injury was determined at Rs.2,16,000/-. However, considering the victim responsible for 60% contributory negligence, he was awarded only 40% of the whole sum of compensation. Learned Single Judge has dismissed the appeal in limini. Having perused the statement of claimant, we are unable to find that any inference of contributory negligence could be drawn from his statement. Apart from the statement of claimant himself, there is no other material to which reference has been made by either side to support the finding of the contributory negligence. In these circumstances, we are of the opinion that Motor Accident Claims Tribunal as well as learned Single was in error 3 in finding the appellant to be responsible for contributory negligence in causing accident. So far as amount of compensation awarded is concerned, it was not a matter of appeal before the learned Single Judge. However, the learned counsel for the appellant urges that as a result of aforesaid injury caused due to accident, his right leg has been amputated, therefore, compensation may be enhanced. We are unable to sustain this plea. Apparently, the award has been passed by Motor Accident Claims Tribunal about 5-6 years after happening of the event. The amputation of leg cannot be directly related to injury caused by accident, but appears to be subsequent developments, which may be other than due to accident. The compensation for such injuries cannot be related to remote causes. Hence, the prayer for enhancement of compensation is rejected. Accordingly, the appeal is allowed. The judgment under appeal is set-aside. The finding about contributory negligence is set-aside and the petitioner- appellant is held entitled to full compensation as determined by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal that is to say for 4 Rs.2,16,000/-. The interest on the additional amount shall be @ 9% p.a. from the date of filing of application before the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal. No order as to costs. (BHANWAROO KHAN),J. (RAJESH BALIA),J. /rm