Dr. Nilkamal Bezbaruah vs Tila Devi Newar and Others

V. Dutta Gyani and S.L. Saraf, JJ.—This is an appeal u/s 173 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988.

The claimant Nilkamal Bezbaruah filed a claim petition before the court of Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Guwahati, against the opposite parties for a sum of Rs. 2,00,000/- (Rupees two lakh) on the allegation that on 5.10.1991 at about 9.30 a.m. while he was proceeding from Guwahati towards Jorhat on his company''s Ambassador car No. AS-03-2556 and reached ninth mile point on the G.S. Road, a bus No. ASU 9026 coming from the opposite direction dashed against the Ambassador car as a result of which he was thrown towards the windscreen and sustained grievous injuries of permanent nature. The allegation was that injuries suffered by the claimant in the spinal cord affected the nerve system. There is also numbness and permanent pain in the fingers of the hand and brain concussion due to the impact of the accident. According to the claimant due to the impact of the accident he cannot move freely without the support of an assistant. He further alleged that due to the grievous injuries suffered he has been unable to look after the affairs of the tea garden where he was the Managing Director.

The claimant made the insurance companies of both the Ambassador car and the bus parties to the claim being the respondent Nos. 3 and 6. Written statements were filed on behalf of the respondent Nos. 3, 4, 5 and 6. The Tribunal on consideration of the pleadings such as statements of claim and the written statements framed certain issues, the same are as follow:

(1) Whether the claim petition is maintainable?

(2) Whether there was cause of action for the claim?

(3) Whether the accident took place on 5.10.1991 due to rash and negligent driving and as a result the claimant sustained injuries on his person?

(4) Whether the claimant is entitled to any compensation, if so, to what extent and from whom the same is recoverable?

(5) Any other relief the claimant is entitled for?

Thereafter, the Tribunal on consideration of the depositions of the witnesses, documents and the materials produced and exhibited during the hearing was pleased to direct the insurance companies, the respondent Nos. 3 and 6, to pay in equal shares the total amount of Rs. 20,225/- at 12 per cent interest per annum from the date of the claim petition. Respondent Nos. 3 and 6 did not participate in the hearing. As against the award, the claimant has filed this appeal and submitted that the Tribunal has failed to make due and proper award for compensation. The claimant has submitted that on two counts the compensation as awarded should be increased. He submits that due to grievous injuries of permanent nature of his spinal cord affecting the nerve system it has become impossible for him to move freely without the support of an assistant. As such he has to bear the expenses of an assistant throughout his life. Secondly, he submits that due to the injuries he has to give up part of his duties as Managing Director of a tea garden which now is being looked after by his son. It was submitted that a sum of Rs. 30,000/- was paid by him to his son during the year 1991-92 and since then Rs. 60,000/- is being paid by him to his son every year for looking after the affairs of the company on his behalf.

We have considered the submission of the claimant very carefully and on consideration of the injuries suffered by him in the said accident it is obvious that the claimant was shattered and he is unable to function properly due to his injuries. The accident has affected his spinal cord and nerve system and we accept his claim that he cannot move freely without the support of an assistant. As such he has to bear extra expenses on account of an assistant. Since the claimant is now an old man of 76 years and the accident occurred in the year 1991, i.e., about five years ago. Over a period of five years, he has to depend on an assistant to help him to do his normal activities, we feel that claimant is entitled to the extra expenses which he has to bear due to the injuries suffered from 1991 onwards. The accident has taken place in the year 1991 and the claimant is now aged 76 years he can be expected to live beyond the age of 80 years in view of his family history. However, without further guesswork, we feel that 10 years'' compensation on account of extra expenses of the salary of an assistant is to be allowed to the claimant. As such we direct the insurance companies, respondent Nos. 3 and 6, to pay in equal shares the total sum of Rs. 1,20,000/- as consolidated amount on account of extra burden of expenses to be borne by the claimant on account of an extra assistant. Deposit of Rs. 1,20,000/- in the fixed account will bear an interest of Rs. 1,000/- to Rs. 1,200/- p.m. and the same will be sufficient to meet the expenditure of the claimant on account of extra assistant. We direct the respondent Nos. 3 and 6 to pay the said amount of Rs. 1,20,000/- (Rupees one lakh twenty thousand) to the claimant within a period of six weeks from the date of order, in default the said amount will charge interest at 18 per cent per annum till the date of payment. The claim of the claimant regarding payment of part of his salary to his son on account of looking after his duties requires proper consideration. However, going through the materials placed before the Tribunal, we find nothing to justify the payment on the said account. The claimant has failed to disclose before the Tribunal any resolution of the company whereby the son was authorised to look after the duties of the claimant nor any documents or any other materials have been placed before the Tribunal to show that the claim for the amount as alleged by the claimant has to be paid by him to his son on account of duties to be performed by the son. In absence of any such materials we are unable to make any award or compensation for the same. The additional payment of Rs. 1,20,000/- awarded by this Court will be in addition to the award made by the Tribunal.

In view of the above, the present appeal is disposed of.