Court No. - 26
Case :- FIRST APPEAL FROM ORDER No. - 1904 of 2000
Appellant :- Surendra Singh
Respondent :- Hari Singh And Another
Counsel for Appellant :- Siddharth,Nigamendra Shukla
Counsel for Respondent :- Arun Kumar Mishra
Hon'ble Dr. Kaushal Jayendra Thaker,J.
1. Heard Sri Nigamendra Shukla, learned counsel for appellant, Sri Arun Kumar Mishra, leanred counsel for respondents and perused the record.
2. This petition has been preferred against the judgment and award dated 18.09.2000 passed by Motor Accident Claims Tribunal/Special Judge (Anti Corruption), Meerut in M.A.C.P. No. 165 of 1996, whereby awarding a sum of Rs.1,22,930/- with interest at the rate of 10% per annum as compensation.
3. Brief facts of the case is that Surendra Singh met with the accident for which he claimed compensation against all the respondents. He was 22 years of age, the Tribunal granted compensation of Rs.1,22,930/- of compensation out of which Rs.47930/- was for medical bills pain and suffering was of 5,000/- and a lump sum without any reasoning or without using the multiplier method awarded Rs.70,000/-
4. Submission of learned counsel for appellant is that the Tribunal awarded a sum of Rs.70,000/-, though it is proved that the claimant appellant suffered disability of 50% of right lower limb and 20% of both the upper limbs. It is submitted that the injured was 22 years of age and he was doing agricultural and dairy business and earned Rs.5,000/- per month. Therefore the Tribunal should have awarded the amount as per the judgment in Syed Sadiq Etc Vs. Divisional Manager, United India Insurance Company, 2014 (1) TAC 369. The claimant has not proved his income as Rs.5000/- per month. The income that can be considered as his earning would be Rs.48,000/- per year, as per judgment in Raj Kumar Vs. Ajay Kumar and another, 2011 (1) SCC 343 the disability would be 25% for body as a whole which is rounded up to Rs.12,000/- per annum multiplied by 18 which would be total loss of income which would come to Rs.2,16,000/- that under the head of pain and suffering in those days Rs.35,000/- is awarded. For other expenses, Rs.15,000/- for all other heads hence an additional sum of Rs.2,76,000/- would be admissible.
5. The Judgment of Apex Court in the case of Syed Sadiq Etc Vs. Divisional Manager, United India Insurance Company, 2014 (1) TAC 369 will not apply to facts of this case as far as it relates to loss of marriage prospects Rs.50,000/-, loss of amenities Rs.50,000/-, loss of medical expenses Rs.15,000/- and litigation costs Rs.25,000/- could not apply as it was never pleaded nor proved that he would require any future medical assistance, it has not been proved whether he has married or not and whether he has to undergone any litigation cost, medical and incidental costs are paid as the bills by the tribunal which is not disturbed.
6. Sri Arun Kumar Mishra, learned counsel for respondent insurance company has vehementally submitted that no enhancement is required to be made and has submitted that amount awarded by the tribunal falls within the definition of just compensation. It is further submitted that judgment in Syed Sadiq Etc (Supra) will not apply as far as it relates to other heads.
7. In view of the above, the appeal is partly allowed. The respondent to deposit the amount with interest as granted by the tribunal till the amount is deposited on the additional amount of Rs.2,76,000/-. The decree and judgment shall stand modified to the aforesaid extent. Record and proceeding, if any, be transmitted to the Tribunal forthwith. The Tribunal on deposit of the amount shall disbursed the same immediately without keeping the same in fixed deposit as the enough time has already elapsed.
8. This court is thankful to both the parties for getting very old matter disposed of.
Order Date :- 31.1.2019 Shubhankar