Full Text
HIGH COURT OF DELHI
Date of Decision: 12th September, 2017
IFFCO TOKIO GENERAL INSURANCE CO LTD..... Appellant
Through: Ms. Harsh Lata, Advocate for Ms. Shantha Devi Raman, Advocate
Through: Mr. S.N. Parashar, Advocate
JUDGMENT
1. The first respondent (claimant) was riding on motorcycle bearing registration No.DL-10SA-9036 with his brother Govind from Bawana to Rohini on 13.05.2011 when, in the area of police picket close to Khera Khurd Canal, it was involved in a collision with car make Hyundai bearing registration No.DL-8CN-6016 (the car), coming from the opposite direction. As a result of the collision he fell down and suffered injuries. Accident claim case (Suit No.260/2011) was instituted by him to seek compensation under Section 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 on 21.09.2011, in which driver, owner and insurer of the car respectively were impleaded as party respondents, the last (insurer) now being the appellant before this court, the said 2017:DHC:5371 driver and owner of the car having been shown in the array of appeal as second and third respondents. The Tribunal held inquiry and on the basis of evidence led, by judgment dated 19.05.2016, upheld the claim for compensation on the principle of fault liability holding the car driver responsible for the accident. It awarded compensation in the total sum of Rs.10,22,000/- (rounded off figure), calculating it thus:-
┌─────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┐ │ Sl.No. Head Amount in (Rs.) │ ├─────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┤ │ 1. Medical expenses 8,331/- │ │ 2. Loss of earnings during treatment 38,532/- │ │ 3. Loss of future earnings 6,55,044/- │ │ 4. Special diet 25,000/- │ │ 5. Conveyance 25,000/- │ │ 6. Pain and suffering 1,00,000/- │ │ 7. Loss of enjoyment of life 1,50,000/- │ │ 8. Cost of proceedings 20,000/- │ │ Total 10,21,907/- │ │ 2. The liability to pay the said amount of compensation has been │ └─────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┘
9. The appeal stands disposed of in above terms. R.K.GAUBA, J. SEPTEMBER 12, 2017