IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH F.A.O. No. 2401 of 2003 (O&M) Date of Decision : January 29, 2009 Neeraj .....Appellant Versus Rajinder Kumar and others .....Respondents CORAM : HON'BLE MR JUSTICE T.P.S. MANN Present : Mr. Ajay Singla, Advocate for the appellant. None for respondents No. 1 and 2. Mr. Inderjit Sharma, Advocate for respondent No. 3. T.P.S. MANN, J. The claimant/appellant had filed a petition for grant of compensation to the tune of Rs.20,00,000/- on account of injuries received by him in a motor vehicular accident on 13.6.2001. In his petition, he had pleaded that he was 26 years of age and working as an Accountant with M/s J.P. Enterprises, Ludhiana from where he was earning about Rs.5,000/- every month. On 13.6.2001, at about 2.00 P.M., he was going on a scooter bearing registration No.PB-10-11-5619 from Samrala Chowk side towards Sherpur Chowk at slow speed and on the left side of the road. When he reached near H.P. Dharmkanta (weigh scale), a truck No. HR-01-GA-0529 driven by respondent No.1 at a very high speed and in a rash and negligent manner came from behind. Without giving any indication or blowing the horn, respondent No.1 hit the truck against the scooter of the claimant as a result of which he was dragged. He received multiple grievous injuries on F.A.O. No. 2401 of 2003 -2- his arm, chest and other parts of the body. He suffered respiratory trauma and injuries to his lungs. He had to undergo six operations and incurred an amount of Rs.4,00,000/- on his medical treatment. He became bed ridden and could not stand or walk properly. He lost his capacity to work and had become totally disabled. Because of rupture of his left lung and fracture of his ribs, he could not breath properly and there were less chances of his condition improving. He was still getting treatment. However, he was not able to sit properly and do his job as an Accountant. In their joint written statement, respondents No.1 and 2, who were driver and owner, respectively, of the offending truck denied any accident having taken place due to rash and negligent driving of the truck but pleaded that it was the claimant, who was himself rash and negligent which led to the accident. Separate written statement was filed by respondent No.3- Insurance Company with which the truck was insured. It was pleaded therein that respondent No.1 was not having valid driving licence at the time of the accident and the truck did not have a valid Registration Certificate, fitness certificate and route permit. Other allegations levelled in the claim petition were denied. However, it was admitted that the truck was insured with respondent No.3 at the relevant time. After hearing learned counsel for the parties and going through the evidence brought on the record, learned Tribunal had found that the accident in question had taken place due to the rash and negligent driving of the truck by respondent No.1 and, therefore, the claimant was entitled to F.A.O. No. 2401 of 2003 -3- receive an amount of Rs.5,00,000/- as compensation alongwith interest at the rate of 9% per annum from the date of filing of the claim petition till actual realization, which was to be payable by all the respondents jointly and severally. The present appeal has been filed by the claimant with a prayer for enhancement of the amount of compensation, as according to him, the compensation awarded by the learned Tribunal was grossly inadequate. While awarding Rs.5,00,000/- as compensation, learned Tribunal made the following items as its basis :- (i) Medical expenses incurred : Rs.3,00,000/- (ii) Special diet and cost of nursing : Rs. 10,000/- (iii) Loss of earning during hospitalisation for a period of three months : Rs. 7,500/- (iv) Loss of earning capacity : Rs.1,08,000/- (v) Physical shock, pains and sufferings : Rs. 15,000/- (vii) Loss of amenities of life : Rs. 20,000/- (vii) Damages of expectation of life : Rs. 20,000/- (viii) Inconvenience, hardship and discomfiture : Rs. 19,500/- Total : Rs.5,00,000/- After going through the evidence available on the record, the Court is of the view that no interference needs to be made in respect of the amounts granted by the learned Tribunal to the claimant as regards expenses on medical treatment; special diet and cost of nursing; physical shock, pains and sufferings; loss of amenities of life; damages of expectation of life and inconvenience, hardship and discomfiture. However, the monthly income of the appellant at Rs.2,500/-, as assessed by the Tribunal, was on the lower F.A.O. No. 2401 of 2003 -4- side and so also the loss of earning capacity. According to the claimant, he had studied upto 10+2 and used to work as an Accountant and earning Rs.5,000/- per month. Mere fact that he had not done any course or diploma in accountancy is no ground to hold that his monthly income could just be Rs.2,500/-. By all reasonable standards, his monthly income at the time of the accident can be assessed at Rs.3,000/- and as he remained hospitalized for a period of three months, his loss of earning was Rs.9,000/- and not Rs.7,500/- as assessed by the learned Tribunal. Therefore, the amount granted to the claimant on account of loss of earning during his hospitalization is enhanced by Rs.1,500/-. Learned Tribunal assessed the earning capacity of the claimant to be Rs.600/- per month or Rs.7,200/- per annum and after applying the multiplier of 15, granted an amount of Rs.1,08,000/- under the head 'loss of earning capacity'. It has come in the evidence of PW2 Dr. Narinder Verma that the claimant had undergone four major surgeries and cured to some an extent but not completely. He added that whatever a normal person could do, the claimant could do upto 70% of that. The disability from which the claimant suffered might get reduced with exercise, treatment and passage of time to some an extent but not completely. Taking into consideration all the relevant factors, it can be concluded that the loss of earning capacity of the claimant was Rs.750/- per month or Rs.9,000/- per annum. After applying the multiplier of 15, the total loss of earning capacity works out to be Rs.1,35,000/-. Thus, the claimant is entitled to enhancement of an amount of Rs.27,000/- under the said head as F.A.O. No. 2401 of 2003 -5- he was granted an amount of Rs.1,08,000/- only by the learned Tribunal. During the pendency of the appeal, the claimant filed C.M. No.3903-CII of 2006 under Order XLI Rule 27 read with Section 151 C.P.C. so as to place on record various medical bills as additional evidence. According to him, though he was awarded Rs.3,00,000/- by the Tribunal towards medical expenses already incurred yet he was not fully cured and had to take follow up treatment subsequent to the passing of the award. Vide order dated 16.3.2006, notice of the application was issued and it was ordered to be heard with the main case. Learned counsel for respondent No.3 has objected to bills mentioned at serial Nos. 1 to 5, 32 and 33 in para 6 of the application on the ground that none of these bills was in respect of the treatment received by the claimant for the injuries he had received in the accident, as the aforementioned bills were raised in respect of angioplasty/stent graft performed on the claimant. However, he expressed his helplessness in opposing the stand of the claimant about obtaining further treatment and incurring expenditure for the injuries suffered by him in the accident. In that respect bills and receipts have been mentioned at serial Nos. 6 to 31 and 34 to 71 in the list mentioned in para 6 of the application and copies of these bills attached with the said application. Under these circumstances, the prayer made on behalf of the claimant is accepted to the extent of bringing on record bills mentioned at serial Nos. 6 to 31 and 34 to 71 in para 6 of the application by way of additional evidence. F.A.O. No. 2401 of 2003 -6- A perusal of the bills and receipts, which have now been brought on record would reveal that the claimant had spent approximately an amount of Rs.20,000/- for getting further treatment after the decision of the Tribunal and, therefore, he is entitled to obtain the said amount also as compensation. Accordingly, the total compensation awarded by the Tribunal is enhanced by Rs.48,500/- (Rs.1,500/- under the head of loss of income during hospitalization, Rs.27,000/- under the head of loss of earning capacity and Rs.20,000/- towards expenditure incurred by the claimant upon his treatment subsequent to the decision of the Tribunal). Resultantly, the compensation is enhanced from Rs.5,00,000/- to Rs.5,48,500/-. The claimant shall be entitled to interest @ 9% per annum on the amount awarded by the Tribunal from the date of filing of the claim petition till its actual realisation. The claimant shall also be entitled to interest on the enhanced amount @ 9% per annum from the date of filing of the claim petition till actual realisation. The appeal is allowed to the extent indicated above. ( T.P.S. MANN ) January 29, 2009 JUDGE satish Whether to be referred to the Reports : YES / No