FAO No. 2908 of 2007 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH FAO No. 2908 of 2007 Date of decision 24.2.2010. Shri Abhay Priya Dogra ...... Appellant. versus Shri Amrit Lal & Others ...... Respondents. CORAM:- HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE K.C. PURI Present : Mr. H.S.Bakshi, Advocate for the appellant. Mr. Ravinder Arora, Advocate for Insurance Company respondent No.3. K.C.PURI. J. The appellant has filed this appeal against the Award dated 10.1.2007 passed by Shri S.K.Garg, Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Jalandhar for enhancement of the compensation amount on account of injuries sustained by him in the motor vehicular accident. As per facts recapitulated from the record are that on 6.6.2004, the claimant and Manraj Singh were in Tata Safari No.PB-10-4177, which was being driven by Manraj Singh and the other two were following them in another vehicle. At about 8.30p.m., when they reached a little ahead of petrol pump in the area of Sultanpur, a Canter bearing registration No.HR- 30-3355 (in short – offending vehicle) came from opposite side, being driven by respondent No.1 at a high speed and he lost control over the FAO No. 2908 of 2007 2 vehicle and it came on the wrong side of the road and struck its side against Tata Safari as a result of which it fell in a pit in the nearby field. The claimant received grave and serious injuries including fracture of C-6 Vertebra which paralysed his whole body. The driver of the Canter was so rash and negligent that even after having struck against the Tata Safari, he struck his vehicle against two cyclists, namely Sukhdev and Phool Chand and thereafter struck against a tree. Respondent No.1 was overpowered by Amit Sharma and Anirudh Sharma and other members of the public at the spot but after sometime he ran away from there after leaving his Canter there. FIR No.110 was got registered against respondent No.1 with regard to the accident in question at Police Station Barwala on the next day i.e. on 7.6.2004. The injured was removed to PGI and from there he was shifted to Fortis Hospital, Mohali and then he was taken to Satyam Hospital, Jalandhar. He remained admitted in the said hospital from 8.6.2004 to 24.6.2004 and is still lying completely paralysed. Respondent Nos.1 and 2 in their joint written statement denied the accident in question. According to them, no accident has taken place with the Canter driven by respondent No.1. The police of Police Station Barwala falsely implicated him in the criminal case otherwise he has nothing to do with the accident or other related developments. Therefore, there was no question of paying any compensation by them to the claimant. Respondent No.3 Insurance Company has alleged in its written statement that the driver of the offending vehicle was not having a valid driving licence at the time of accident and the offending vehicle was being plied against the terms and conditions of the insurance policy. The accident, FAO No. 2908 of 2007 3 if any, has taken place due to rash and negligent driving of the Tata Safari and as such the petition is not maintainable. No details of the compensation claimed has been given. Amit Sharma and Anirudh Sharma are the false witnesses. Following issues were framed :- 1.Wheher the claimant received injuries in motor vehicular accident which accrued on 6.6.2004 due to rash and negligent driving of truck/canter Tata Safari No.PB-10F-4177 which was being driven by its driver respondent No.1? OPP. 2. Whether the claimant is entitled to the compensation, if so, how much and from whom ?OPP. 3. Whether the claim petition is not maintainable ?OPR. 4. Relief. To establish its case claimant examined Anirudh Sharma, eye- witness of the accident (PW-1), Manraj Singh (PW-2), Dr.Aman Kapoor (PW-3), Abhay Priya Dogra petitioner himself appeared as his own witness as (PW-4), Narinder Bajaj (PW-5), C.N.Pardeep (PW-6) and Mahesh Kumar (PW-7). On the other hand, the respondents examined Amrit Lal- respondent as RW-1. After appraisal of the aforesaid evidence, learned Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Jalandhar partly accepted the claim petition and awarded Rs.7,70,000/- along with interest @ 8% per annum from the date of petition till realization of the amount. The respondents No.1 to 3 were held jointly and severally liable for payment of the compensation amount. FAO No. 2908 of 2007 4 Feeling dis-satisfied with the above said Award, claimant has filed appeal for enhancement of compensation. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and have gone through the records of the case. The only dispute in the present case is regarding amount of compensation. The Tribunal has granted an amount of Rs.7,70,000/- The details of which is given as under :- 1. Amount on medical expenses Rs.2,69,570/- 2. Amount on account of disability Rs.3,00,000/- 3. Amount on account of pain and suffering, loss of amenities of life, special food, future medical expenses etc. Rs.2,00,000/-. Total Rs.7,70,000/-. The claimant suffered 100% permanent disability as per disability certificate Ex.CW4/S-1. The Tribunal held that claimant has to live rest of his life with frustration, disappointment, unhappiness and inconvenience. The claimant is aged 22 years and he was studying in Plastic Moulding Technology in Central Institute of Plastic Engineering and Technology, Amritsar. His date of birth was 2.6.1982 and the accident has taken place on 6.6.2004. So, he was just crossed his 22 years on the date of accident. According to the claimant he was earning Rs.8000/- per month and the accident rendered him completely paralyzed and destitute . He lost his job as well as studies and became completely dependent for all his daily FAO No. 2908 of 2007 5 activities. He has to employee helper for 24 hours. The Tribunal has not granted any amount regarding attendant for whole of his life. So, the claimant is held entitled to claim Rs.3,00,000/- on account of attendant which needs to be employed by him throughout his remaining life. The amount granted by the Tribunal regarding future loss, i.e. permanent disability, is also on lower side. He has to spend whole of his life as he has become a crippled person on account of 100% disability. So, the amount of Rs.3,00,000/- in this connection stands enhanced to Rs.4,30,000/-. So, in this manner the claimant is held entitled to claim compensation of Rs.12,00,000/- in all. The claimant is also held entitled to claim interest @ 7% per annum from the date of appeal till realization on the enhanced amount of Rs.4,30,000/-. The amount of Rs.4,30,000/-, awarded by this Court, shall carry the same rate of interest as awarded by the Tribunal till realization of the said amount. With the aforesaid modification in the award, the appeal stands disposed of accordingly. A copy of this judgment be sent to the trial Court for strict compliance. ( K.C.PURI ) JUDGE February 24, 2010 sv