Full Text
HIGH COURT OF DELHI
Date of Decision: 23.10.2019
SANJAY SETH ..... Appellant
Through: Mr. D.K. Sharma, Advocate.
LTD) ..... Respondents
Through: Mr.Sameer Nandwani, Advocate with Mr.Abhay Singh Bhadoria, Advocate for R-3.
Ms.Deepali Gupta, Advocate for R-7.
JUDGMENT
1. This appeal impugns the award of compensation dated 25.04.2017 passed by the learned MACT in Suit No. 168/2013, on the ground that the learned Tribunal has erred in granting only 50% towards functional disability despite there being 100% disability in the spine of the claimant, coupled with bladder and bowel complications and a head injury, as a result of the motor vehicular accident.
2. The extent of the appellant’s injury is such that from a normal/healthy person of the age of 37 years, he has been reduced to a debilitated paraplegic person, wherein his spine can never be moved and can never support his 2019:DHC:5534 body to stand up, his body would be strained with constant physical pain, he would be besieged with the bother of an extensively damaged bladder and bowel movement, as well as head injury, there would be constant irritation with many an issue. The Court is of the view that for his extensively permanently debilitated condition he ought to have been granted 100% functional disability and for the aforesaid reasons, the non pecuniary compensation too ought to have been enhanced.
3. The appellant also seeks provision of a motorized wheel chair. He forgoes the amount of Rs. 1,00,000/- granted to him for wheel chair. He seeks that he be provided a motorized wheel chair suitable to his needs, comfort and convenience. The said request is reasonable because a just compensation should ensure provision of aid and assistance for optimal movement of the injured. Therefore a motorized wheelchair in lieu of a simple wheelchair is granted. The impugned order stands modified accordingly.
4. The appellant is stated to be unmarried. He obviously suffers a huge disadvantage apropos his marriage prospects. Therefore in terms of Parminder Singh v. New India Assurance Co. Ltd. & Ors., 2019 SCC OnLine SC 802, wherein a 22 year old victim of motor vehicular accident had become a paraplegic requiring an assistant throughout his life and had been deprived of having a normal married life, the Supreme Court had granted a lumpsum compensation of Rs.10,00,000/- towards ‘medical expenses’ and ‘attendant charges’ and Rs. 5,00,000/- towards loss of matrimonial prospects. The injured was 37 years old at the time of the accident therefore keeping his age into consideration, he is granted Rs. 5,00,000/- towards ‘loss of matrimonial prospects’.
5. Compensation towards ‘medical expenses’ has been granted @ Rs. 2,00,000/- and is otherwise covered through ESI.
6. Accordingly, the amount payable to the appellant is revised as under: S.No. Details Compensation
1. Compensation for Medical expenses Rs.2,00,000/-
2. Compensation for pain & suffering Rs.2,00,000/-
3. Compensation for special diet, conveyance and attendant charges Rs.70,000/-
4. Loss of future earning capacity/future income Rs. 50,62,500/- [Rs.18,750/- (monthly income) x 12 (months) x 15 (multiplier) x 150/100 (loss of future prospects)]
5. Compensation for loss of amenities and enjoyment of life Rs.1,50,000/-
6. Compensation for disfigurement Rs.2,50,000/-
7. Loss of income during treatment Rs.1,50,000/-
8. Wheel Chair Nil
9. Loss of matrimonial prospects Rs. 5,00,000/- TOTAL Rs. 65,82,500/-
7. The aforesaid revised amount shall be deposited before the learned Tribunal, alongwith interest @ 9% per annum from the date of filing of the claim petition till its realization, within three weeks from the receipt of copy of this order, to be released to the beneficiary of the Award in terms of the scheme of disbursement specified therein. Upon deposit of the revised amount, an amount of Rs.5,00,000/- shall be released to the claimant right away in a bank account maintained near his place of residence. The learned Tribunal shall ascertain the veracity of the bank account. Cheque book shall not be issued by the banker. Withdrawal shall be permitted only by withdrawal slip given personally to the injured.
8. Apropos the motorized wheel-chair, the appellant shall intimate the learned counsel for the insurance company the date and the time when he would be visiting the vendor, who will supply the motorized wheel chair. The insurance company will pay the cost of the said motorized wheel chair directly to the vendor on an advance invoice being supplied to it. The said wheel chair shall have a lifetime warranty. The appellant shall be given the telephone numbers and E-mail Ids of three responsible officers of the insurance company, who shall respond to the appellant in case any difficulty arises apropos the functioning of the wheel chair. Should it require to be changed or upgraded, the same shall be at the cost of the insurance company. By the 5th day of each January and August the insurer shall ascertain the functioning of the wheelchair and otherwise rectify any malfunctioning of it within three days of receipt of such intimation. The parties are at liberty to approach the Court in case of difficulty.
9. The appeal is disposed-off in above terms.