Full Text
FAO No.366/2001
Date of Decision: 11th December, 2009 SUBHASH CHANDRA PRASHARI ..... Appellant
Through : Mr. Manish Kaushik, Adv.
Through : None.
JUDGMENT
1. Whether Reporters of Local papers may YES be allowed to see the Judgment?
2. To be referred to the Reporter or not? YES
3. Whether the judgment should be YES reported in the Digest? JUDGMENT (Oral)
1. The appellant has challenged the award of the learned Tribunal whereby compensation of Rs.6,600/- has been awarded to him. The appellant seeks the enhancement of the award amount.
2. The accident dated 5th August, 1985 resulted in the injuries to the appellant. The appellant was going on his motorcycle from his residence towards Sarojini Nagar Depot and was in a stationary position at the red light of Africa Avenue crossing to take right turn when he was hit from behind by bus bearing No.DEP 6300. The appellant suffered fracture of tibia and fibula bone of his left leg. The appellant 2009:DHC:5376 police and thereafter was treated by Dr. S.K. Mukherjee at Mool Chand Hospital. The appellant proved Ex.PW1/A[1] to Ex.PW1/A-20 which are the receipts of payment made by him to Mool Chand Hospital. The appellant also proved the medical prescription as Ex.PW1/B[1] to Ex.PW1/B-9. The appellant further proved the receipts of payment made to the doctor as Ex.PW1/C[1] to Ex.PW1/C-4.
3. The learned Tribunal observed that there was no proof that the appellant suffered fracture of tibia and fibula. The finding of the learned Tribunal is not based on the evidence on record. It is clearly recorded in Ex.PW1/B-9 that the appellant suffered fracture of tibia and fibula of left leg and he remained plastered till 14th August, 1985 and also undertook physiotherapy till 16th January, 1986. The finding of the learned Tribunal in this regard is set aside.
4. The learned Tribunal has awarded non-pecuniary compensation of Rs.5,000/- which is not appropriate. Considering the nature of injuries suffered by the appellant, the appellant is awarded Rs.15,000/- towards pain and suffering and Rs.10,000/- towards loss of amenities of life. The appellant has been awarded Rs.1,581/- towards expenditure on treatment. The learned Tribunal has not awarded any compensation towards conveyance and special diet. Considering that the appellant remained in plaster and had to visit the doctor and also for physiotherapy, Rs.5,000/is awarded for conveyance and further Rs.5,000/- towards special diet.
5. The appeal is allowed and the award amount is enhanced from Rs.6,600/- to Rs.36,581/- (Rs.15,000 + Rs.10,000 + Rs.1,581 + Rs.5,000 + Rs.5,000) along with interest @ 7.5% per annum from the date of filing of the petition till realization.
6. The enhanced award amount along with interest be deposited by the respondents with the learned Tribunal within 30 days. Upon the aforesaid deposit being made, learned Tribunal is directed to release the same to the appellant.
7. Copy of this order be given ‘Dasti’ to learned counsel for the appellant under signature of Court Master. J.R. MIDHA, J DECEMBER 11, 2009 mk