Back
1997 Supreme(P&H) 564
PUNJAB & HARYANA HIGH COURT
V.K.Bali, J.
Deepak Agnihotri
Versus
Jai Bhan
First Appeal from the Order No. 920 of 1993,
Decided On : APRIL 3, 1997
The assessment of compensation in motor accident cases should be based on the nature and extent of injuries sustained, permanent disability, loss of income, pain and suffering, and medical expenses.
Headnote:
MOTOR ACCIDENT - COMPENSATION - QUANTUM - INJURIES SUSTAINED BY CLAIMANTS - ASSESSMENT - FACTORS CONSIDERED - PERMANENT DISABILITY - LOSS OF INCOME - PAIN AND SUFFERING - MEDICAL EXPENSES - ENGAGEMENT OF DRIVER - CLAIMANTS ENTITLED TO COMPENSATION AS DETERMINED BY TRIBUNAL - NO SCOPE FOR ENHANCEMENT OR REDUCTION.
Fact of the Case:
Deepak Agnihotri, an advocate, his wife Urvashi Agnihotri, and his cousin Manoj Kumar sustained injuries in an accident involving their car and a Delhi Transport Corporation (DTC) bus. They filed claims before the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal (MACT) seeking compensation.
Finding of the Court:
The MACT awarded compensation to the claimants, considering factors such as medical expenses, permanent disability, pain and suffering, loss of income, and engagement of a driver. The DTC appealed against the compensation awarded to the claimants, while the claimants filed appeals seeking enhancement of compensation.
Issues: 1. Whether the compensation awarded by the MACT was excessive or inadequate. 2. Whether the claimants were entitled to enhanced compensation.
Ratio Decidendi: 1. The court upheld the compensation awarded by the MACT, finding it to be just and fair. It considered the nature and extent of injuries sustained by the claimants, their permanent disability, loss of income, and pain and suffering. 2. The court rejected the claimants' plea for enhancement of compensation, holding that the assessment of compensation cannot be based on unforeseen events and that the MACT had taken into account the claimants' future loss of income.
Final Decision: The appeals filed by the DTC and the claimants were dismissed. The parties were left to bear their own costs.
V.K.Bali, J.
1. By this order, I propose to dispose of six connected appeals bearing Nos. 536 and 538 and 919 to 921 of 1993 as all these appeals arise from one accident in which Deepak Agnihotri, an advocate of this Court, his wife Mrs. Urvashi Agnihotri and his cousin Manoj Kumar sustained multiple injuries. Whereas, appeal Nos. 919, 920 and 921 have been filed by the injured-claimants so as to enhance the compensation from the one determined by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal (for short MACT), appeals bearing Nos. 536, 537 and 538 have been filed by the Delhi Transport Corporation, with an obvious prayer to slash down the compensation that has since already been granted to the claimants.
2. Brief facts of the case reveal that Deepak Agnihotri, an advocate practising in the Punjab & Haryana High court, his wife Urvashi Agnihotri and his cousin Manoj Kumar met with an accident when the car bearing Registration No. DL-1C-8190 which was driven by Deepak Agnihotri collided with a bus of Delhi Transport Corporation bearing registration Nos. DL1P-9033. This accident took place on April 26, 1992 near Indri Byepass, Karnal. The claimants through petitions filed by them before the MACT claimed Rs. 7,50,000/- (for injuries sustained by Deepak Agnihotri), Rs. 3,50,000/- (for injuries sustained by Mrs. Urvashi Agnihotri) and Rs. 2,00,000/- (for injuries sustained by Manoj Kumar. Learned MACT, in all allowed Rs. 2,97,000/- to Deepak Agnihotri on various counts. An amount of Rs. 1,80,000/- was determined as compensation payable to his wife Mrs. Urvashi Agnihotri whereas Manoj was held entitled to Rs. 30,000/-. Inasmuch as no arguments at all have been addressed with regard to negligence, and for which there is no scope as well, as a firm Finding, based upon evidence has been recorded, that driver of the bus was negligent and for which alone accident had taken place, there is no necessity at all to go into that issue. The only debate in the present appeals is with regard to quantum of compensation. Before this matter is discussed any further, it will be useful to see the injuries sustained by the claimants.
3. Immediately after accident, Deepak Agnihotri was medico legally examined by Dr. D.P. Goel of Civil Hospital, Karnal, who found following injuries on his person: -
1. Multiple abrasions on dorsum of right hand.
2. Multiple abrasions on both the knees.
3. Incised would 1" x 1/4" x skin deep on front of right knee.
4. He was unable to lift the left shoulder completely. X-ray of the left shoulder was advised.
5. He was having multiple abrasions on left forehead.
4. He complained of pain in right chest. After getting first aid, he was shifted to PGI, Chandigarh where he was treated by Dr. Jaswant Rai, Professor of Orthopaedic, who found following musculo skeletal injuries on his person:-
a) Fracture rib 7th on the right side of the chest.
b) Displaced fracture grater tuberosity left arm bone. (Fracture dislocation for the upper end of the left arm bone).
Similarly, Mrs. Urvashi Agnihotri was medico legally examined at Civil Hospital Karnal. Following injuries were found on her person by the doctor attending on her at Karnal:-
(1) Multiple abrasions on face, nose, upper Up and chin.
(2) Small abrasions on right ring finger.
(3) Small multiple abrasions on left fore-arm.
(4) Multiple abrasions on both the legs.
(5) She complained of pain right chest. X-ray was advised.
After getting first aid, she was referred to PGI where she was treated by Dr, Jaswant Rai, who found following injuries on her person:-
"1. Crack fracture upper end of the left arm bone.
2. Fracture 5th, 6th and 7th ribs of the right side of chest."
Manoj Kumar sustained following injuries:-
1. There was multiple small abrasion on frontal part of the tongue.
2. He was having bleeding per nose. X-ray of the nose was advised.
3. He was complaining of pain, left part of the chest. X-ray of chest was advised.
4. Abrasion 1" x 1/2" on front of left knee.
5. Abrasion 1"
