Full Text
HIGH COURT OF DELHI
Date of Decision: August 21, 2018
SAVITRI DEVI (DECEASED) THR HER LRS ..... Appellant
Through: Mr. V.V. Gautam and Mr. Prashant Dubey, Advocates
Through: Mr. Navneet Goel, Advocate for Mr. Sameer Nadwani, Advocate for respondent-Insurer
MADHU ..... Appellant
Through: Mr. V.V. Gautam and Mr. Prashant Dubey, Advocates
Through: Mr. Navneet Goel, Advocate for Mr. Sameer Nadwani, Advocate for respondent-Insurer
LATIKA SHARMA ..... Appellant
Through: Mr. V.V. Gautam and Mr. Prashant Dubey, Advocates
MOTI RAM & ORS (TATA AIG GENERAL INS CO LTD) ..... Respondents
Through: Mr. Navneet Goel, Advocate for Mr. Sameer Nadwani, Advocate for respondent-Insurer
JUDGMENT
1. The above-captioned three appeals pertain to one vehicular accident, which took place on 23rd October, 2004 and so, with the consent of learned counsel for the parties, these appeals have been heard together and are being decided by this common judgment.
2. The above-captioned first appeal is by the legal heirs of a housewife-Savitri aged 68 years, who had sustained grievous injuries in this accident and after about four years, she had otherwise died on 4th February, 2008. The Motor Accident Claims Tribunal (hereinafter referred to as „the Tribunal‟) has granted compensation of ₹1,06,385/with interest @ 9% per annum.
3. The above-captioned second appeal pertains to a 42 years old housewife-Madhu, w/o of Narender Sharma, who was grievously injured and had sustained 48% permanent disability in relation to her left ankle and knee. The Tribunal has assessed the functional disability of injured- Madhu at 25% and has awarded compensation of ₹3,26,961/- with interest @ 9% per annum to her.
4. The above-captioned third appeal relates to an 18 years old 2018:DHC:5286 MAC.APP. 408/2017 MAC.APP. 415/2017 MAC.APP. 418/2017 student-Latika, D/o Narender Sharma, who was grievously injured in this vehicular accident and due to the injuries sustained by her in this accident, she had entailed loss of income for a period of four months. The Tribunal has granted compensation of ₹91,412/- with interest @ 9% per annum to her. In these appeals, the Tribunal has found that the deceased and injured persons were travelling in the insured car and the negligence was of the driver of the offending vehicle, i.e. Jeep, which was not insured and so, the liability to pay the awarded compensation has been put upon driver and owner of the offending vehicle i.e. Jeep.
5. The facts, as noticed in the impugned Award, are as under:- “Brief facts of the case as revealed from the petition are that on 23.10.2004, the petitioner/injured Smt. Savitri Devi alongwith her other faimily was going in Indica Car bearing registration No. DL-4C-M-8846 from Delhi to Khatoo Shamji at District Sikar, Rajasthan, which car was driven by Sh. Devender Kumar/R[3] at the relevant time at a slow speed and on the correct side of the road. When at about 8:30 pm, they reached between Khatoo Shamji and Reengus Road and were only about 3-4 km. Away from Khatoo Shamji, suddenly a jeep bearing registration No. RJ-14-3C-3831 (hereinafter referred to as the “offending vehicle”) which at the relevant time was driven by Sh. Moti Ram/R[1] in a rash, negligent and also zig zag manner came from the front side and it struck against their Indica Car due to which the petitioner including various other persons sitting in the said car sustained injuries. Further, the petitioner was taken to CHC Reengus hospital at Sikar where the doctors attended her vide IR NO. 304-C and after first aid, she was referred to SMS Hospital at Jaipur, where she remained admitted from 24.10.2004 to 28.10.2004 and even thereafter, she was referred for further treatment to Maharaja Agarsain Hospital, Delhi where she remained under treatment from 28.10.2004 to 01.11.2004.”
6. The Tribunal has relied upon the evidence of Claimants, Injured persons and other evidence on record to render the impugned Awards. The breakup of the compensation granted by the Tribunal to legal heirs of deceased-Savitri is as under: -
┌───────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┐ │
┌───────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┐ │
┌──────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┐ │
┌─────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┐ │ Sl. Compensation under various Award Amount │ │ No. heads │ ├─────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┤ │ 1. Loss of Income Rs. 28,940/- │ │ MAC.APP. 408/2017 Page 9 of 11 │ │ MAC.APP. 415/2017 │ │ MAC.APP. 418/2017 │ │ 2018:DHC:5286 │ │ 2. Loss of future earning capacity Rs. 1,57,500/- │ │ 3. Pain and suffering Rs. 50,000/- │ │ 4. Loss of enjoyment of amenities Rs. 40,000/- │ │ of life │ │ 5. Conveyance and special diet Rs. 10,000/- │ │ 6. Medical expenses Rs. 66,473/- │ │ 7. Attendant charges Rs. 10,000/- │ │ Total Rs. 3,62,913/- │ │ 16. In case of Injured-Latika, aged 18 years, I find that she was a │ └─────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┘
17. There is nothing on record to conclude that due to injuries suffered by Injured-Latika, she had suffered any disfiguration and so, the Tribunal has rightly not granted any compensation under this head. In the considered opinion of this Court, the compensation granted to Injured- Latika under the „non pecuniary heads‟ is just and proper and so, no case for enhancement of compensation under the head of „pain and suffering‟, etc., is made out. Even the compensation under the heads of „special diet‟, „attendant charges‟, etc. appears to be justified and is thus maintained. The compensation payable to Injured-Latika is reassessed as under: -
┌────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┐ │ Sl. Compensation under various Award amount │ │ No. heads │ ├────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┤ │ 1. Pain and suffering ₹30,000/- │ │ 2. Special diet ₹5,000/- │ │ 3. Conveyance Charges ₹5,000/- │ │ 4. Attendant Charges ₹20,000/- │ │ 5. Medical Bills ₹19,836/- │ │ 6. Loss of Income ₹13,372/- │ │ Total ₹93,208/- │ └────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┘
18. Consequentially, the compensation granted to the legal heirs of deceased-Savitri is maintained. However, compensation granted to Injured-Madhu by the Tribunal is enhanced from ₹3,26,961/- to ₹3,62,913/- and compensation granted to Injured-Latika is also enhanced from ₹91,412/- to ₹93,208/-.
19. With aforesaid modifications in the impugned Awards, the above captioned three appeals are accordingly disposed of.
JUDGE AUGUST 21, 2018 v