Khukhumoni Sarkar vs Biswajit Nath And Ors

This appeal is filed by the original claimant seeking enhancement of the compensation awarded by the Claims Tribunal. The appellant had received injuries principally on her leg in a vehicular accident. The disability certificate issued by the District Disability Medical Board, West Tripura, Agartala was produced at Exbt.5. In the certificate it was stated that the appellant was suffering from locomotor disability (temporary). It was further stated that "restricted movement due to fracture both bone middle part by RTA". Disability was assessed at 60%. This certificate contained following two further clauses:

"(i) This condition is progressive.

(ii) Re-assessment is recommended after 5 year 0 month and validity of certificate upto 11th October, 2022".

Dr. D. B. Roy, who was the panel doctor, was examined as P.W-2. He deposed that upon examination the petitioner found to be carrying disability to the tune of 60% according to the certificate issued by the medical board. In the cross-examination, he agreed that the leg of the claimant had not shortened due to the injury. However, the disability certificate was issued as she found difficulty in walking. The certificate was for a temporary period.

Two disturbing aspects emerged from the disability certificate and the deposition of the panel doctor. Firstly, the disability certificate which is issued for a temporary period, leaves the claimant to a great disadvantage. No permanent assessment of loss of income could be made on account of the disability certificate having a limited life. If the disability was permanent, the medical board ought to have assessed such permanent disability.

This pattern of issuing disability certificates with a limited validity period came up for consideration before this Court in case of Samir Chandra Das Vrs. Md. Jamal Hossain and another in Mac App No.03 of 2019 dated 31st January, 2020 wherein the Court deprecated such practice and provided that henceforth unless special circumstances exist, disability certificates would be issued on permanent basis.

The second disturbing aspect of the matter is that there is no basis for assessing the disability of the injured as high as 60% when the certificate and the deposition of the doctor suggest that there was no shortening of the limb and the injured merely suffered difficulty in walking. The certificate does not specify whether 60% disability is of the body as a whole or it is of the particular limb. In order to assess loss of income in motor accident claim cases it would be crucial for the Tribunal or the Court to gather the disability of the body as a whole and not merely localized for a particular limb of the body.

It is simply not possible to accept that the appellant had suffered 60% disability of the body as a whole. Even the disability of 60% of a particular limb is highly exaggerated, particularly when the evidence suggests that there was not even a shortening of the leg.

Under the circumstances, let the appellant appear before the District Disability Medical Board, West Tripura, Agartala within a period of two weeks from today. The Board shall assess the disability of the claimant and state whether there is permanent disability or not? If there is permanent disability, the assessment shall be given of the body as a whole and not confined to one limb only. Let such certificate be produced before the Court on the next date of hearing.

List the matter on 5th August, 2020.