Compensation under the Motor Vehicles Act must accurately reflect loss and restore the claimant's position post-accident.

JUDGMENT :

Sudeepti Sharma, J. (Oral)

1. The present appeal has been preferred against the award dated 20.11.2006 passed in the claim petition filed under Section 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 by the learned Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Jagadhri (for short, 'the Tribunal') for enhancement of compensation, granted to the appellant/claimant to the tune of Rs.3,25,000/- on account of the injuries sustained by the appellant-Nirmal Kumar in a Motor Vehicular Accident, occurred on 02.07.2004.

2. As sole issue for determination in the present appeal is confined to quantum of compensation awarded by the learned Tribunal, a detailed narration of the facts of the case is not reproduced and is skipped herein for the sake of brevity.

SUBMISSIONS OF THE LEARNED COUNSELS FOR THE PARTIES

3. The learned counsel for the appellant/claimant contends that the compensation assessed by the learned Tribunal is on the lower side. He further contends that the appellant was working as skilled automobile mechanic and was also having a canter, which he used to ply on hire basis and was earning Rs.15000/- per month and was 24 years of age at the time of the accident. He further contends:-

ii) That he remained admitted in PGI Chandigarh as indoor patient from 02.07.2004 to 18.07.2004.

iii) That the appellant suffered permanent disability to the extent of 80% as his left leg was amputated.

iv) That the amount granted for special diet, pain and suffering, attendant charges and transportation charges is on lower side and no amount was granted for loss of amenities of life. Therefore, he prays that the present appeal be allowed and compensation be enhanced, as per latest law.

4. Per contra, learned counsel for the respondent, however, vehemently argues on the lines of the award and contend that the amount of compensation as assessed by the learned Tribunal, has rightly been granted to the appellant/claimant. Therefore, he prays for dismissal of the present appeal.

5. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the whole record of this case.

6. A perusal of the record shows that the appellant/claimant was 24 years of age at the time of the accident. Learned Tribunal has erred in assessing the monthly income of the appellant/claimant as Rs.2500/-per month. However, under the prevailing facts of the present case, his income is to be assessed as Rs.2800/- per month in accordance with the minimum wages prescribed for skilled worker in the State of Haryana.

ii) That the appellant has suffered permanent disability to the extent of 80% due to amputation mid thigh, which is proved on record vide disability certificate as Ex.P-5.

iii) That the amount granted for special diet, pain and suffering, attendant charges and transportation charges is on lower side and no amount was granted for loss of amenities of life.

iv) Since this case pertains to the category of burnt cases of the year 2007, only impugned award dated 20.11.2006 is available with this Court, hence, this Court has decided the case in hand accordingly. The learned Tribunal in its award had not specifically mentioned the amount given for medical expenses incurred by the claimant, therefore, since the record is not available, this Court in the interest of justice, deems it appropriate to award a sum of Rs.20,000/- to the claimant under the Head of medical expenses. Therefore, the award requires indulgence of this Court.

SETTLED LAW ON COMPENSATION

7. Hon'ble Supreme Court has settled the law regarding grant of compensation with respect to the disability. The Apex Court in the case of Raj Kumar Vs. Ajay Kumar and Another (2011) 1 Supreme Court Cases 343, has held as under:-

5. The p