Back
2023 Supreme(Del) 1681
IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
Najmi Waziri, J.
Jyoti Singh – Appellant
Versus
Nand Kishore & Ors. – Respondents
MAC.APP. 870 of 2011 & CM APPL. 8909 of 2020 and MAC.APP. 768 of 2011
Decided On : 11-04-2023
Mr. Saurabh Kansal, Ms. Ashu Chaudhary, Mr. Divyam Aggarwal and Mr. Arjun Goswami, Advocates, for the Claimant-Jyoti Singh.
Mr. A.K. Soni and Mr. Pavan Kumar, Advocates, for the ICICI Lombard.
Mr. Tarun Johri and Mr. Vishwajeet Tyagi, Advocates, for the DMRC.
Mr. Tushar Sannu, ASC for NDMC with Mr. Devrat Tiwari and Mr. Azad Bansal, Advocates.
Mr. Balendu Shekhar, CGSC with Mr. Raj Kumar, Advocate, for the Ministry of Railways.
Mr. Nikhil Sharma and Mr. Aditya Gupta, Advocates, for the BRPL and BYPL.
Mr. Gautam Narayan, ASC GNCTD with Mr. Harshit Goel, Advocate.
Mr. Manish Kumar Srivastava and Mr. Sagar Arora, Advocates, for the TPDDL.
Mr. Rikky Gupta, SC, for DTC with Ms. Ananya Singh, Advocates.
The main legal point established in the judgment is the consideration of specific needs and expenses related to a claimant's lifelong medical condition in determining the compensation.
Headnote:
Compensation - Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal - Kajal vs. Jagdish Chand and Ors., (2020) 4 SCC 413 - The court discussed the appellant's 100% permanent disability and the need for enhanced compensation based on medical opinions and specific needs. The court awarded compensation for medical and sanitary expenses, attendant charges, physiotherapy, wheelchair, loss of marriage prospects, pain and suffering, KAFO, special diet, and loss of future earnings.
Fact of the Case:
The appellant, a 14-year-old girl, suffered a debilitating motor-vehicular accident, resulting in 100% permanent disability. The Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal awarded her compensation, which she and the insurer impugned on various grounds.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that the appellant suffered from 100% functional disability and required lifetime medical care and assistance. It enhanced the compensation to cover various specific needs and expenses related to her lifelong medical condition.
Issues: The issues included the appellant's 100% permanent disability, the adequacy of the awarded compensation, and the specific needs and expenses related to her medical condition.
Ratio Decidendi: The court relied on medical opinions and specific needs of the appellant to determine the enhanced compensation, considering expenses for medical and sanitary needs, attendant charges, physiotherapy, wheelchair, loss of marriage prospects, pain and suffering, KAFO, special diet, and loss of future earnings.
Final Decision: The court enhanced the compensation by Rs.65,09,779, awarding a total of Rs.1,12,59,389 payable at 7.5% p.a. from the date of filing of the claim petition. An amount of Rs.5,80,093 had already been paid towards medical expenses.
JUDGMENT
Najmi Waziri, J. (Oral)
The hearing has been conducted through hybrid mode (physical and virtual hearing).
1. The appellant was a 14 year old adolescent, enjoying all the fun of a school-going girl of her age, till the fateful afternoon of 1st December, 2007 when returning from school, she met with a debilitating motor-vehicular accident. She has been rendered wheelchair bound for the rest of her life. The Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal (`MACT') has awarded her a compensation of Rs.47,49,610/-. She has impugned it (MAC.APP. 870/2011) on various grounds. The insurer too has impugned the award (MAC.APP. 768/2011) contending that the awarded amount was on the higher side.
2. She contends that she has suffered 100% disability, therefore, the compensation should be enhanced. She relies upon the dicta of Supreme Court in Kajal vs. Jagdish Chand and Ors., (2020) 4 SCC 413, which, while dealing with a similar case of a 12 year old school going girl having suffered 100% disability, awarded enhanced compensation.
3. Dr. B. Kanhar, Senior Orthopedic Surgeon, Aruna Asaf Ali Government Hospital, Delhi (PW-5), who had been her attending doctor has deposed that Jyoti has suffered 100% permanent disability in relation to her spine and both her lower limbs and the condition is not likely to improve. The impugned award has discussed his evidence as under:
"...
PW-5 Dr. B. Kanhar, Senior Orthopedic Surgeon, Aruna Asaf Ali Government Hospital, Delhi has proved the permanent disability certificate of Jyoti Singh as Ex.PW 1/6. He stated that as per the disability certificate patient had suffered 100% permanent disability in relation to spine and both lower limbs and the condition is not likely to be improved.
On being cross-examined by Sh. Shashi Shankar, counsel for respondents no. 1 & 2 he stated that he can state on the basis of his experience that such persons do not show any improvement as far as such disability is concerned.
On being cross-examined by Ms. Suman Bagga, counsel for respondent no.3 he stated that he had examined the patient for the purpose of issuance of disability certificate and had issued disability certificate on the basis of guide lines issued by Government of India. He has proved the guide lines as Ex.PW5/DA. He stated that he cannot comment that advanced technology or treatment can improve the condition of patient. He stated that no Neruro Surgeon had assessed the disability of petitioner in the present case.
..."
4. To similar conclusion has been the deposition of PW-6-Dr. Mathew Varghese, Head of Department of Orthopedic Surgery, St. Stephen's Hospital, Delhi, who too has opined that the appellant suffers from serious medical conditions, which are not likely to improve throughout her life. The impugned award deals with his evidence as under:
"14. He stated that the petitioner had suffered fracture of spine with paraplegia with bladder bowel involvement. She had saddle anaesthesia in the sitting and perineal area. Her muscle power in the lower limbs was found to be zero for the foot and ankle, zero for the knee, zero for internal and external rotation of the hip. She was maintained on urinary bladder drainage using an intermittent catheter insertion by an attendant. Over the period of evaluation till May,2009 she has not shown any significant improvement in her muscle power and she continues to be wheel chair bound and continuous to need catheterization for her bladder functioning. She is also on regular suppositories for her bowel functions. She needs regular exercise, regular urine evaluation for culture and evaluation of kidney function to exclude any renal failure. The patient has not shown any improvement in her bladder functions and function of the lower limb. He further stated that in future she is affected for sexual function and needs regular monitoring by physiotherapists for maintenance of existing muscle function. The recurring expenses per annum with cost per session may be up to Rs.400/- or more depen
