Poonam Kumar v. Nand Lal Shah

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE K. KANNAN

1. Whether Reporters of local papers may be allowed to see the judgment ? To be referred to the Reporters or not ?

2. 3. Whether the judgment should be reported in the Digest? K. KANNAN J. -.-

1. The appeal arises out of an accident, which took place on

01.04.1995 when a truck bearing registration No.HRG-902, driven in a rash and negligent manner, dashed against a scooter bearing registration No.DBV-9396. The appellant being pillion rider of the scooter fell down due to collision and the offending vehicle ran over his leg resulting in grievous injuries. The appellant was got admitted in Civil Hospital Gurgaon but later he was referred to the Sadarjang Hospital, Delhi. His statement was recorded by the police, on the basis of which, FIR Ex.P8 was registered. The appellant had suffered fractures on his leg and he remained admitted in the Safdarjang F.A.O No.46 of 1998 2 Hospital, Delhi for 4/5 months, where a rod was inserted in his leg. Thereafter, he was shifted to Gurgaon but again he remained admitted in Safdarjang Hospital, Delhi for getting treatment for the puss. The injured-claimant remained admitted in the hospital again for about one month when fixator of rod was removed. The injured-claimant examined many witnesses in support of his claim.

2. Before the Tribunal, the appellant appeared in the witness box as PW-5 and deposed that he got fracture in his leg and he was treated by Dr. A.K. Singh in Safdarjang Hospital, who did his skin grafting also. He further stated that he remained confined to bed for a period of about six months and he visited the hospital for follow up treatment for 20/25 times and every time, he paid Rs.500/- as van charges. He also took the special diet and he spent about Rs.1 lac on treatment and medicines. It has further been deposed by the appellant-claimant that he cannot walk without the help of others and is unable to lift weight. He even cannot go to toilet for answering the call of nature without support. He further deposed that prior to the accident, he was working as Manager in Haryana Techno Fab, Basai Road, Gurgaon and was getting salary of Rs.4,000/- p.m. and now he has apprehension that his employer will not take him back in service and he will be suffering a loss of Rs.4,000/- p.m. Dr. Sanjay Narula PW2 has deposed that he examined the injured medico legally on

01.04.1995 and found three injuries on his person. PW6, Dr. A.K. Singh, Consultant Central Institute of Orthopaedic, Safdarjang Hospital, Delhi, deposed that he examined the injured with the alleged history of road accident. He further stated that the patient F.A.O No.46 of 1998 3 had sustained fracture on thigh bone side with compound fracture of both bones leg and impending vascular impairment to the right lower limb, multiple contusion and abrasions to the whole body. He had undergone surgery for vascular impairment and interlocking nailing was done for the right femur. The patient was discharged for the first time on 24.05.1994. Thereafter, external fixator was applied and he was discharged again on 07.06.1995. The patient was regularly being followed and had a persistent infection of thigh wound and the leg fracture. External fixator was removed and the petitioner was readmitted again on 15.07.1995 and was discharged on 26.02.1997. He has undergone another surgery for fracture of leg. The appellant has got infected wound over the right femur with discharging sinus and has a permanent stiff knee with no movement and compartment syndrome of the right leg with foot drop and total loss of movement of ankle and foot and loss of sensation. His disability was assessed at 50% permanent in the nature.

3. Dr. Akhlak Ahmad who was examined as PW-4, has stated that on 09.10.1996, injured-claimant was examined by the Medical Board consisting of himself, Dr. S. Bhardwaj and Dr. N.K. Jain, Civil Surgeon. He further deposed that after examination of relevant documents, the board opined that there were several restrictions of movements at the right ankle and moderate to severe restriction of movements of the right knee i.e. 130 degree and thus, the assessed disability was 30+21=51%. F.A.O No.46 of 1998 4

4. PW-1, Ghansham, Ahlamd to the Criminal Court brought the file relating to the criminal case registered against the driver- respondent No.1 of the offending truck, which was owned by respondent No.2. The appellant produced medical bills Ex.P1 to Ex.P102 but only Ex.P97 to P100 were proved by PW7, Manoj Kumar, Proprietor-cum-Pharmacist, JR Sons Medico-Shakurpur, Delhi. The Tribunal calculated the amount of medical bills at Rs.17,363/-. The Tribunal after taking into consideration of all the relevant facts and circumstances awarded an overall compensation of Rs.90,000/- for pain and suffering, special diet, medical expenses spent on treatment and the amount spent on special diet.

5. Learned counsel for the appellant submitted that the learned Tribunal has not applied its judicial mind while determining the compensation and the amount awarded under all the heads is grossly low and pleaded for enhancement. There is no representation for the respondents. I accede to the contention of the learned counsel and I am prepared to reappraise the amount under all the heads for the injuries suffered by the claimant. I have seen the record and calculated the medical bills from Ex.P1 to Ex.P102, total of which comes to Rs.44704/-. The appellant had also produced bills of amount spent on treatment at Safdarjang Hospital and exhibited the same as Mark A to Mark C, total of which comes to Rs.11,841/-. I will take the full amount spent on medical treatment for a period of about six months hospitalization and provide for Rs.56,545/- towards the amount spent on medical expenses. For pain and suffering, for surgery F.A.O No.46 of 1998 5 and hospitalization for over six months, I will provide for Rs.50,000/- and another amount of Rs.25,000/- for special diet and Rs.12000/- for transportation. He remained on bed for almost six months and he must have required an attendant to take care of him. I will provide for attendant charges at Rs.10,000/-. For 51% permanent disability, I would provide him Rs.1,00,000/-. It was stated by the appellant that he was working as Manager in Haryana Techno Fab, Basai Road, Gurgaon and was earning Rs.4,000/- per month. I will take his loss of earning capacity at 25% and will take his loss of income as Rs.12,000/- per annum. The appellant-claimant was 21 years of age at the time of accident and I will adopt a multiplier of 18. I will provide him Rs.2,16,000/- for loss of earning. I will provide him another Rs.50,000/- for reduction of expectancy of life and for reduction of his value for getting fresh job in the market. In all the total amount that will become payable would be Rs.5,19,545/-, which I will round off to Rs.5,19,500/-. The amount in excess of what has already been awarded by the Tribunal shall bear in interest @6% from the date of the petition till the date of payment. The liability shall be on the owner and insurer only. Having regard to the fact that there is valid insurance, the right of enforcement of the award shall be obtained against the insurer.

6. The appeal filed for enhancement by the appellant is allowed to the above extent. November 09 , 2010 Pankaj* (K. KANNAN) JUDGE