1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JODHPUR J U D G M E N T CIVIL MISC. APPEAL No. 497 of 1997 GANESHLAL V/S R S R T C & ANR Date of Judgment : 6.11.2008 PRESENT HON'BLE SHRI N.P.GUPTA,J. Mr. A.K.Khatri, for the appellant. Mr. B.L.Bhati, the respondent. BY THE COURT: This appeal has been filed by the claimant against the award of the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Ratangarh dated 14.5.1997 awarding a total compensation of Rs.51,481/- on account of personal injuries of the appellant. Necessary facts are that the claimant was moving on his bicycle from towards Loha going towards Ratangarh, at that time, the delinquent bus of the Corporation hit the bicycle, as a result of which he fell down, and sustained injuries, started bleeding from ears and mouth, sustained fractures of the right leg, and also sustained other 2 injuries. He was carried to Ratangarh, where FIR was lodged. Then he was shifted to Bikaner, where he remained hospitalized for long time. It is alleged that he is continuing under treatment right from the date of accident being 17.10.1995, and has been completely disabled from working. It is claimed that he was earning Rs.60/- per day. The aspects of happening of the accident, suffering of the injuries and negligence are not in controversy, therefore, I need not detain myself on that. So far as the question of quantum is concerned, the learned Tribunal has considered this aspect in issue No.3, and has awarded Rs.10,000/- for the medical expenses, considering the bills, which had been produced, which totalled to Rs.9073/-, and considering the evidence that some bills had been misplaced. Likewise, a sum of Rs.588/- has been awarded for transportation of the victim from Ratangarh to Bikaner by ambulance, for which receipt has been produced on record. Then a sum of Rs.1643/- had been awarded as attendant's expenses for lodging and boarding for a period of 53 days, considering the receipt of inn showing Rs.6/- per day to be the rent, and considering Rs.25/- per day to be for the food etc. of one person per day. In my view, these amounts do not require any interference in appeal. 3 Then the learned Tribunal has awarded Rs.4250/- on account of loss of income of the claimant, considering his having not been able to work for a period of 85 days, and calculated the amount @ Rs.50/- per day. Learned Tribunal has held that it is not shown from the discharge certificate that the claimant has been rendered permanently disabled, and no doctor has been produced, and he has been discharged only on having recovered, still learned Tribunal has considered that he may have taken rest for another one month. Then it has been considered that the claimant was working as a labour in pipe-fitting, and he has sustained fracture in the leg, but there is no certificate to show any disability in the leg, and in the discharge certificate, the mandible has been shown to have been properly united, while in the leg rode has been placed. In my view, this amount awarded requires substantial enhancement, inasmuch as, superficially, taking the considerations taken by the learned trial Court may be alright, but then at a close look at the record shows that the claimant has sustained severe internal injuries in the head, and the CT scan show more than one haematoma in parietal and temporal regions. Likewise, the medical papers also show that looking to the gravity of those haematoma the management of his other injuries was deferred, lest things may take serious turn. Obviously, it is required to be noticed that haematoma takes very long time in liquidating, and till it liquidates, it cannot be assumed 4 that the person can undertake his normal pursuit, and job at the risk of his life. It is, in this background, that a look at the statement of the claimant, which was recorded on 13.11.1996 i.e. just after about an year of accident, shows that he has clearly deposed that even today he is not able to discharge his duties of earning livelihood, rather he is on liquid diets. In that view of the matter, the loss of income was required to be considered at least for a period of one year, which according to the calculations made by learned trial Court comes to Rs.18,000/-. Thus, this figure of Rs.4250/- is enhanced to Rs.18,000/-. Then the learned trial Court had awarded total amount of Rs.34,000/- for the injuries by computing Rs.5000/- for grievous injuries, and Rs.1000/- for each of the simple injuries, and then has awarded a sum of Rs.1000/- for inconvenience to be suffered by the claimant during this period. Likewise, no amount of compensation has been awarded under the head loss of expectation of life. In my view, the approach of the learned trial Court is not correct, inasmuch as, looking to the gravity of the injuries as noticed above, the parameters applied on the basis of the Second Schedule about the injuries are wholly unwarranted. In my view, under all the three heads, the appellant should be awarded a minimum compensation of Rs.1,00,000/-. Thus, the amount awarded by the learned trial Court is enhanced by an amount of Rs.78,750/- as 5 above. The appeal is accordingly partly allowed and the amount of compensation awarded by the learned Tribunal being Rs.51,481/- is enhanced to Rs.1,30,231/-. Other stipulations of the award are maintained. ( N P GUPTA ),J. /tarun/