IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI MACA No.159/2010 Date of Decision; Tulv 14. 2010 NEW INDIA ASSURANCE CO LTD Appellant through Mr. L.K.Tyagi, Advocate versus RAM SANJEEVAN & ORS Respondents through Mr. V.P.Chaudhry, Senior Advocate with Mr. Nitinjya Chaudhry, Advocate for respondent No. 1. CORAM: HON'BLE MISS JUSTICE REKHA SHARMA 1. Whether the reporters of local papers may be allowed to see the judgment? 2. To be referred to the reporter or not? 3. Whether the judgment should be reported in the 'Digest'? A REKHA SHARMA. I. (0RAT;> f This appeal has been preferred by the Insurance Company against the quantum ofcompensationawarded to respondent No.l. It is not disputed by the learned counsel for the Insurance Company that respondentNo.l has suffered 100% disabilityin the accident. The Claims Tribunal while calculatingthe compensation payableto him has taken minimumwages as the basis of his income. The future prospects have been calculatedin terms of the law laid down by the SupremeCourtin the case of Sarla Veima &Ors. Versus MACA No.159/2010 Page 1 of 3 Digitally Signed By:AMULYA Certify that the digital file and physical file have been compared and the digital data is as per the physical file and no page is missing. Signature Not Verified V Delhi Transport Corporation & Anr, reported in 111(2009) ACC 708. The income so calculated comes to Rs.10,73,088/-. In addition to this, respondent No.l has been awarded Rs.82,000/- towards medical expenses, Rs.50,000/- for future care and attendant expenses, Rs.1,50,000/- for pain and suffering, Rs.1,50,000/- for loss of expectation of life, Rs.50,000/- for depression and mental stress in life, Rs.1,25,000/- for loss of marriage prospects, Rs.30,000/- for special diet and Rs.20,000/- for conveyance In all, he has been awarded a sum of Rs.17,30,088/- along with interest thereon @ 7.5% per annum. ' On March 16, 2010 respondent No.l was directed to remain present in the Court. He though has come to the Court but not on his own feet. He has been brought to the Court by his relatives on a stretcher. He appears to be in a paralytic state. He is unable to move his limbs. His present physical state leaves me in little doubt that he will live in a vegetative state for the rest of his life. What a tragedy? He deserves compassion, sympathy and a humane approach. The T Tribunal, in my view, has not gone wrong in calculating the compensation payable to him. I do not find the same to be in any way excessive. There is no merit in the appeal. The same is dismissed. It is stated that the compensation has already been deposited in terms of the award of the Tribunal. However, having regard to the physicalstate of respondentNo.l, the award is being modifiedto the extent that a sum of Rs.4,00,000/-shall be released to bim and the rest of the amount shall be kept in fixed deposits as ordered by the Tribunal. Since it is not possible for respondent No.l to travel to MACA No.l 59/2010 Page 2 of 3 r Delhi again, let the cheque for the sum of Rs.4,00,000/- be prepared in his name and be delivered to him through his Advocate. The statutory amount deposited by the appellant as a pre-condition to the hearing of the appeal be refunded to the appellant. A copy of this order be given Dasti to the learned counsel for respondent No.l, under the signatures of the Court Master. JULY 14, 2010 ka REKHA SHARMA, J. MACA No.l59/2010 Page 3 of 3