The court upheld the principle of just compensation, emphasizing the need for thorough assessment of disability's impact on earning capacity, rather than a mechanical approach in determining compensation.

JUDGMENT :

Archana Puri, J.

These are two appeals filed by claimant-Simranjit Singh as well as New India Assurance Company Limited, thereby, assailing the Award passed by learned Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, whereby, compensation was granted to Simranjit Singh, on account of injuries sustained, in a motor vehicular accident.

2. On appraisal of the evidence, brought on record, it was held by learned Tribunal that accident had taken place on 14.06.2011, on account of rash and negligent driving of Alto car bearing registration No.PB-23J-4171, driven by Raghbir Singh, who was impleaded as respondent No.1 before learned Tribunal, in the capacity of being driver-cum-owner of the aforesaid car. Further, it was held that Simranjit Singh had sustained injuries in the accident in question, which resulted into amputation of his right arm.

3. Thereupon, learned Tribunal, while considering the earnings of claimant-Simranjit Singh as Rs.1500/- per month, annual whereof comes to be Rs.18,000/-, had applied the multiplier of '18' and worked upon the compensation as Rs.3,24,000/-. Besides the same, another amount of Rs.15,000/- was granted towards sufferings and trauma and another amount of Rs.5,000/- was granted, on the count of 'loss of amenities and enjoyment of life'. Further, an amount of Rs.2,67,548/- was granted, towards medical bills. Thus, in total, the compensation to the extent of Rs.6,11,548/- was granted. Learned Tribunal also ordered about the realization of the aforesaid extent of compensation from respondent No.2 i.e. insurance company, who is the insurer of the offending car.

4. Being aggrieved, claimant-Simranjit Singh has filed the appeal for seeking enhancement of the compensation, whereas, the insurance company has filed the appeal for seeking recovery rights.

5. For the convenience of discussion, the parties are referred to as making appearance before learned Tribunal.

6. Suffice to consider that the accident taken place on 14.06.2011.

7. It is the pleaded case of claimant-Simranjit Singh that he was 18 years old, at the time of accident and he was working as Generator Operator with Sukhvir Singh Electrical Shop, Khanna Road, Amloh, Fatehgarh Sahib. In his affidavit Ex.PW1/A, the claimant has categorically deposed to this effect. Besides deposing about manner of taking place of the accident and imputing rashness and negligence, on the part of respondent No.1-Raghbir Singh, he had further deposed about details of the injuries suffered by him and the treatment undergone by him. He further deposed that he remained admitted in PGI from 14.06.2011 to 26.06.2011 and right arm was amputated.

8. Even, the claimant examined Dr.Jaideep Singh Chahal, who proved the disability certificate Ex.C15. PW-3 Vijay Kumar, who is employee of Endolite, has proved the invoice of prosthetic limb relating to Simranjit Singh. The medical bills have also been produced in evidence, the detail whereof, has been given by learned Tribunal, in paragraph No.9 of the Award, which are to the extent of Rs.2,67,548/-.

9. Be it noted that respondent No.1-Raghbir Singh, driver-cum-owner, has not filed any appeal. It is the insurance company, which has filed the appeal to challenge the liability fastened upon it, to pay the compensation awarded by learned Tribunal.

10. In this backdrop, the 'work on' of the compensation aforesaid, do call for re-determination.

11. Before proceeding further, it shall be appropriate to make beneficial reference to decision rendered in Smt.Sarla Verma vs. Delhi Transport Corporation and anr., 2009(3) RCR (Civil) 77, wherein, the Hon'ble Supreme Court held that the 'just' compensation is adequate compensation and the Award must be just that-'no less and no more'. The plea of the victim suffering from a cruel twist of fate, when asking for some more, is not extravagant, but it is for seeking appropriate recompense, to negotiate with the unforeseeable and the fortuitous twists, in his impaired life. Therefore, while the money awarded by Court