'<! ' < \c -i ""· '!> .., _, • •• " I * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI MACA No.626/2010 Date of Decision: September 27. 2010 - CHANDER KANT@ VIKAS ..... Appellant through Mr. S.N.Parashar, Advocate versus_ DHARAMBEET SINGH & ORS · , .... Respondents .through Mr. L.K.l\iagf, Advocate for respondent No.3. .. .. ·. CORAM: . . . . HON.BLE MISS JUSTICE REKHA SHARMA 1. Whether the reporters of local papers may be alloVyed to see the· judgment? 2. To. be referred to the r:eporter·or not? 3. Whether the judgment should be reported in the 'Digest'? REKHA SHARMA, I. (ORAL) · This appeal has been preferred. by the appellant against the impugned award dated February 25, 2010 on the ground. that even though as per the disability certificate Exh.PW4/A, he· has _suffered . . . . disability of 54% in relation to his right lower limb, the learned Motor Accident Claims Tribunal has taken the over-all disability as 30% and on that basis has calculated the compensation. The appellant is a boy of 12 years. He was a student at the time of the accident and obviously was having no income. A perusal of the impugned award shows that the Claims Tribunal in view of the . . MACA No.626/2010 · Page 1 of 2 jj:, ' ·. Signing Date:12.08.2024 17:00:54 Certify that the digital and physical file have been compared and the digital data is as per the physical file and no page is missing. Signature Not Verified ;_ <?. I , . -. L.·· ·'.- ." , ·non-earning status of the appellant took notional income o'f 15,000/- as the basis for calculating' the compensation payable to him and - ·added 50% to the same towards future prospects. As regards the . qisability, the C(aims Tribunal· having regard to the fact that the . ' . . accident has. affected only one limb of the appellant, took the over-all functional disability as ·30%. I find no infirmity in either the Tribunal taking the notional income of the appellant ·as 15,000/- and adding 50% to the same by way of future prospects or in taking the fu-nctional disability of the<appellant as 30% vis-a-visthe whole body. However, I do feel that the appellant has not been adequately compen?ated under ' ' the head "loss ·of amenities of life". The appellant has been 40,000/- under this head which I feel' is on the lower side. .nature of permanent disability· that he has suffered is such that it will cause him discomfort forever and will_ also come in his way of fully enjoying the amenities of life. Besides, he has also been permanently disfigured. I, therefore, award him a further sum 40,000/-:. The Insurance Company is directed to pay the additional_ sum of along with interest @ 7.5% per annum from th.e date of filing of the claim petition till realization. However, the Insurance Company shaH have the right to recover this amount from the owner and the driver of the offending vehicle. The appeal is disposed of. SEPTEMBER 27; 2010 ka ·:. ' -· .. MACA No.626/2010 c';& ,· L\ •• Page 2 of 2 ....