Ashok Kumar Gurjar vs Santosh Ahirwar and Others

Rajendra Menon, J.—Claiming enhancement of the compensation awarded to the appellant by the Third Additional Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Gwalior in claim case No. 55 of 2005, the appellant/claimant has filed this appeal. Inter alia contending that for the injury sustained by the appellant i.e., fracture on his right leg and damage to his left leg knee cap, the appellant has undergone surgery and a rod was implanted in his leg, compensation of Rs. 25,000 (Rupees twenty-five thousand only) is on the lower side.

On 3rd December, 2004 an accident took place when a dumper bearing registration No. MP-07 G-2625 collided head-on with a truck bearing registration No. UP 093 E 1490 near Gurdwara public road, Tekenpur, District Gwalior. In the said accident, claimant, Ashok Singh Gurjar who was travelling in the truck sustained injuries on his right leg and knee cap of the left leg. Because of the injuries sustained, the claimant/appellant was treated by Dr. Anupam Gupta (PW 4) in his private clinic and remained in hospital from 5th December, 2004 to 10th December, 2004, he was operated upon and was unable to carry out his routine work for more than six months. Claiming compensation of Rs. 2,50,000 (Rupees two lakh fifty thousand only), the claim petition was filed and by the impugned award to the tune of Rs. 25,000 (Rupees twenty-five thousand only) has been awarded.

Mr. Arun Sharma, learned Counsel for the appellant inviting my attention to the documents, Exts. P-5 to P-28 argued that the receipts with regard to medical expenses filed are for a sum of about Rs. 20,000 (Rupees twenty thousand only) and the claimant/appellant was operated upon and iron rod was implanted in his right leg and knee cap was damaged because of the accident and he could not carry out his work of vending milk and had to remain out of employment for about 9 months. The learned Tribunal without considering all these factors granted the compensation of Rs. 25,000 (Rupees twenty-five thousand only), it is argued by Mr. Sharma that the compensation awarded is on the lower side.

Learned Counsel appearing for the Insurance Company refuted the aforesaid and argued as the learned Tribunal has granted adequate compensation to the appellant, no further enhancement in the award is called for.

Having heard learned Counsel for the parties and on perusal of the record, I find that the compensation awarded by the Tribunal is on the lower side and it does require some enhancement.

From the evidence and material available on record, it is clear that the appellant had sustained the injuries as indicated hereinabove and because of the said injuries he was hospitalised and treated by PW 4. Dr. Anupam Gupta, Ext. P-15 is the discharge ticket which indicates that he was admitted on 5th December, 2004 and was discharged on 10th December, 2004. Ext. P-17 is a receipt for Rs. 12,500 (Rupees twelve thousand five hundred only) issued by the doctor for performing surgery on the appellant. Similarly, documents Exts. P-16 to P-27 are various receipts showing payment of bills for purchase of medicines and other medical expense, total amount of all these bills comes to about Rs. 19,961 (Rupees nineteen thousand nine hundred sixty-one only), i.e., approximately Rs. 20,000 (Rupees twenty thousand only). That apart, the nature of injury sustained by the appellant clearly indicates that he would have remained confined to his house and unable to move around and attend to any normal work for about six months. For that period, no compensation for loss of earning has been awarded by the Tribunal. Ignoring all these factors the Tribunal has merely awarded a sum of Rs. 25,000 (Rupees twenty-five thousand only) and the findings recorded in paragraph 17 of the award indicates that it has been done casually without analysing the various relevant factors necessary for determination and assessment of the compensation. That being so, it has to be held that the compensation assessed by the Tribunal is not proper.

In the facts and circumstances of the case, it is to be held that the appellant is entitled to the following amounts as compensation:

(i) The appellant is entitled to Rs. 20,000 (Rupees twenty thousand only) as medical expenses incurred by him and proved on the basis of the documents Exts. P-16 to F-26;

(ii) As he had suffered serious injury in his right leg and was operated upon and according to his own statement he was unable to work and move around and remain confined to his house and was unable to attend to his normal works, he is entitled to a compensation of Rs. 50,000 (Rupees fifty thousand only) for the injuries suffered by him.

(iii) Appellant was a milk vendor and for the injury sustained by him he would have to remain out of work for atleast six months. Normally, persons like the appellant would have earned between Rs. 1,000 and 1,500 per month and if assessed his income per month as Rs. 1,250, then he would be entitled to Rs. 7,500 (Rupees seven thousand five hundred only) for the loss of wages during the said period. To this a sum of Rs. 2,000 (Rupees two thousand only) is added towards special diet and a further sum of Rs. 1,000 (Rupees one thousand only) towards transportation and other expenses can be added which works out to total compensation Rs. 80,000 (Rupees eighty thousand only).

Accordingly the award passed by the learned Tribunal is modified and it is held that the appellant is entitled to a total compensation Rs. 80,000 (Rupees eighty thousand only).

The Insurance Company having been held liable to make payment of the compensation, the Insurance Company shall pay total compensation amounting to Rs. 80,000 (Rs. 30,000 as awarded by the learned Tribunal and the enhanced amount of compensation of Rs. 50,000 (Rupees fifty thousand only) to the claimant along with interest at the rate of 6% per annum from the date of the award passed by the Tribunal till the date of realisation.

The appeal stands allowed in part with the enhancement of the compensation to the extent indicated hereinabove.

Accordingly, the appeal stands disposed off with the aforesaid without any order as to cost.