AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
Alka Sarin, J
This order of mine shall dispose of aforementioned two appeals bearing FAO No.9219 of 2014 and FAO No.9220 of 2014 preferred by the claimants
in respect of the same accident and which claim petitions were disposed of by a common award dated 04.07.2014 whereby an amount of Rs.
11,89,250/- was granted as compensation to Satpal and an amount of Rs. 6,15,831/- was granted to Mukesh along with 7% interest per annum from
the date of filing of claim petition till the date of realisation. Dissatisfied with the amounts awarded as compensation, the present appeals have been
preferred.
In brief, the facts relevant to the present case are that on 31.05.2012 at about 11.15 P.M. the appellants Satpal and Mukesh were standing on the
service lane of National Highways-8, near T-Point of TCI Company opposite of Joniwas cut. In the meantime, driver of trailer bearing registration No.
KA-42-6845 came from Dharuhera side in a rash and negligent manner while driving at a very high speed and abruptly took a turn towards the right
side without any horn or signal and struck against Satpal, Mukesh and one Kuldeep. Kuldeep is stated to have died on the spot while Mukesh and
Satpal were taken to hospital.
The claimant Satpal remained admitted in the hospital from 01.06.2012 to    08.06.2012 in Park Hospital, Gurgaon, and from 08.06.2012 to
17.06.2012 and then from 20.06.2012 to 02.07.2012 and again from 07.07.2012 to 19.07.2012 in Aarvy Hospital and thereafter from 25.07.2012 to
06.08.2012 in J.P. Trauma Centre, Delhi and from 25.08.2012 to 08.09.2012 at Mirpur, M.S. Institute, Rewari, and is stated to have spent about Rs. 5
lakhs on treatment. He was stated to be still under treatment and had to undergo number of surgeries and, at the time of filing of the petition , two
surgeries were still stated to be due.
Claimant Mukesh was admitted to Apex Hospital, Dharuhera and remained admitted from 31.05.2012 to 01.06.2012 and then from 01.06.2012 to
12.06.2012 in Birendra Hospital, Rewari and from 13.10.2012 to 26.10.2012 in Rao T.R Memorial, Jhaffarpur and is stated to have spent more than
Rs. 1,25,000/-on his treatment and transportation. He was also stated to be still under treatment at the time of filing of the claim petition.
Claimant Satpal was aged 26 years and was 12 th class pass with I.T.I. Diploma of two years in Electronics. He is stated to have had a transport
business and was managing two tractors and engaged in Omax Company, Dharuhera and was earning Rs. 25,000/- a month. Claimant Mukesh, was
stated to be 23 years of age and working as a driver with Omax Auto Limited, Dharuhera, and was earning Rs. 30,000/- per month, but due to the
aforesaid accident it was claimed that he had lost his present and future income.
The claim petition was contested by respondent No.3 (Insurance Company) by filing their written statement wherein a preliminary objection was
raised with regard to the cause of action as also the factum of the accident was denied . It was further pleaded that the driver of the offending vehicle
was not holding a valid and effective driving licence. None appeared on behalf of respondent Nos.1 and 2 (driver and owner) and they were
proceeded against ex-parte vide order dated 29.05.2013.
On the basis of the pleadings and evidence on record, the tribunal awarded an amount of Rs. 11,89,250/- as compensation to Satpal and an amount of
Rs. 6,15,831/- to Mukesh along with 7% interest per annum from the date of filing of the claim petitions till realisation. Dissatisfied with the amounts
awarded, the present appeals have been preferred.
I have heard the learned counsel for the parties.
It has been contended by the learned counsel for the appellants that the amounts awarded are on the lower side, inasmuch as, the income has not
correctly been assessed by the Tribunal. Further, it has been contended that the amount of compensation awarded under the heads pain & suffering,
special diet, attendant charges, transportation, etc. is on the lower side.
Per contra, learned counsel for the respondent No.3-Insurance Company has contended that a just compensation has already been awarded and there
is no scope for enhancement .
The argument of the learned counsel for the appellants qua the income of the injured in both the appeals deserves to be rejected, inasmuch as, no
evidence has been produced qua the income and, therefore, the income has rightly been assessed as that of an unskilled labourer at the time of the
accident. Keeping the disability and the injuries in mind, the multiplier system has been applied and the compensation awarded under the said head is
as per the dictum laid down by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Raj Kumar vs. Ajay Kumar and another, reported as (2011) 1 SCC 343.
No evidence has been adduced in either case regarding future treatment and, hence, no amount has been awarded under the said head.
I find that the compensation awarded in both the cases under the heads pain & sufferings, special diet, attendant charges and transportation is grossly
on the lower side. Both the claimants had undergone long treatment fo r the injuries received by them. In fact, Satpal and Mukesh, i.e., both the
claimants, have produced on record ample evidence to show their hospitalisation from time to time. Keeping in mind the long period of treatment that
the claimants had to undergo, I deem it just and appropriate to increase the compensation under the head pain & suffering to Rs. 1,50,000/-from Rs.
20,000/- and further under the heads special diet, attendant charges and transportation to Rs. 1,00,000/- from Rs. 20,000/-. Both the claimants would,
hence, be entitled t o an enhanced amount of Rs. 2,10,000/- each in addition to the amounts already awarded by the Tribunal. The enhanced amount of
Rs. 2,10,000/- to each of the claimants would carry an interest at the rate of 7% per annum from the date of filing of the claim petitions till the date of
realisation.
In view of the above, the award of the Tribunal stands accordingly modified. The appeals are, hence, allowed in the aforementioned terms .