The main legal point established in the judgment is the entitlement to enhanced compensation for future medical treatment based on medical evidence presented.

JUDGMENT

Rekha Palli, J. (Oral)

1. The present appeal preferred by the claimant under section 173 of the Motor Vehicles Act seeks enhancement of the compensation awarded by the learned Motor Accidents Claim Tribunal. Vide the impugned award dated 23.01.2019, the learned Tribunal has awarded a sum of Rs. 6,50,000/- along with interest @9% p.a as compensation to the appellant.

2. It is the case of the appellant that on 19.01.2011 at about 7.30 am, while the appellant Shri Gaurav Gupta was travelling with his colleague Shri Sumit Vij from his residence at Ghaziabad to his office in Gurgaon, in a car bearing registration number UP-17T-0803 being driven by one Shri Rajkumar, a tyre of the car got punctured. The car was therefore parked on the left side of the road near Rajasthan Petrol Pump, Nitish Kunj, NH-8. While the driver was changing the tyre, a Tavera car bearing registration number HR-55DT-9200 being driven in a rash and negligent manner came from behind and collided with them, resulting in grievous injuries to the appellant. The appellant was rushed to the Neelkanth Hospital Gurgaon, where he remained hospitalised for 18 days. As the appellant's kidneys got damaged on account of injuries suffered by him due to the accident, he preferred a claim petition before the learned Tribunal, claiming a sum of Rs.20,00,000/- as compensation.

3. On the basis of the evidence led before it, the learned Tribunal came to a conclusion that the injuries sustained by the appellant were caused due to the rash and negligent driving of the car insured with respondent no. 3 and consequently awarded a sum of Rs. 6,50,000/- as compensation to the appellant along with interest @9% p.a. from the date of filing the claim petition till 23.04.2012 and thereafter from 20.08.2018 till the date of realization. This amount included a sum of Rs. 1,00,000/- as compensation towards pain and suffering and a sum of Rs. 50,000/- towards special diet, conveyance and attendant charges besides a sum of Rs. 5,00,000/- as compensation under the head of shortening of life. For awarding this amount of Rs. 5,00,000/- by way of compensation towards shortening of life the learned Tribunal relied on the testimony of Dr R.K Yadav, Assistant Professor, Department of Nephrology, AIIMS, Delhi/PW2 who had categorically stated that the left kidney of the appellant was not functioning at all and he was already at stage-III of chronic kidney disease with no chances of revival. For the sake of convenience the heads under which the appellant has been granted compensation may be noted hereinbelow in a tabular form:

4. Being aggrieved, the appellant has preferred the present appeal seeking enhancement of the compensation awarded by the Tribunal.

5. In support of the appeal, learned counsel for the appellant has made three submissions. His first and foremost submission being that the learned Tribunal erred in refusing to grant any interest to the appellant for the entire period between 23.04.2012 and 19.08.2018 on the erroneous presumption that the hearing of the claim petition during this period was being deferred only on account of the appellant's fault. The learned Tribunal failed to appreciate that most of the adjournments were being sought only on account of the failure of the doctors summoned by the appellant to appear before the learned Tribunal. He submits that the learned Tribunal ought to have appreciated that unless the summoned doctors appeared in Court, the appellant could not prove the percentage of his disability. In support of this plea that in such circumstances, when the claimant alone cannot be faulted for delay in adjudication of his claim petition, he should not be denied interest for the period during which the petition remained pending adjudication, he seeks to place relian