Back
1996 Supreme(MP) 828
High Court Of Madhya Pradesh
S. K. DUBEY, USHA SHUKLA
SHAFIQ - Appellant
Versus
PRAMOD KUMAR BHATIA - Respondents
M. A. 244 Of 1996
Decided On : 09/17/1996
Amrit Ruprah, H.S.RUPRAH, Shobha Menon
In personal injury cases, the assessment of damages should be reasonable, moderate, and in line with comparable cases, considering the nature of the injuries, the permanent disability, and the impact on the victim's life.
Headnote:
MOTOR VEHICLE ACCIDENT - COMPENSATION - ENHANCEMENT - ASSESSMENT OF DAMAGES - PRINCIPLES - APPLICATION - CASE FACTS - INJURY RESULTING IN 50% PERMANENT DISABILITY AND SHORTENING OF LEG - APPELLANT UNABLE TO CARRY ON BUSINESS - AWARD OF COMPENSATION ENHANCED.
Fact of the Case:
The appellant, a cloth seller, was injured in a motor vehicle accident, resulting in a 50% permanent disability and shortening of his leg by one inch. He was unable to continue his business of selling cloth by taking rounds from place to place.
Finding of the Court:
The court held that the appellant was entitled to enhanced compensation, considering the nature of the injuries, the permanent disability, and the appellant's inability to continue his business.
Issues: 1. Whether the compensation awarded by the Tribunal was adequate? 2. Whether the principles for assessment of damages in personal injury cases were correctly applied?
Ratio Decidendi: 1. The court held that the compensation awarded by the Tribunal was inadequate, considering the nature of the injuries, the permanent disability, and the appellant's inability to continue his business. 2. The court applied the principles for assessment of damages in personal injury cases, as laid down by the Supreme Court in various judgments, and held that the appellant was entitled to enhanced compensation.
Final Decision: The court enhanced the compensation awarded by the Tribunal from Rs. 59,000/- to Rs. 84,000/- with interest at the rate of 12% per annum from the date of application till deposit.
( 1 ) THIS is an appeal under Section 173 of the Motor Vehicles Act 1988 (for short the 'act') for enhancement of the compensation awarded vide award dt. 2-12-1995 passed in M. C. C. No. 161/95 by VIth Addl. Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Bhopal.
( 2 ) THE appellant used to sell cloth by going round from place to place. On 20-5-1994 at about 3. 30 p. m. when the appellant as pillion rider was going on Scooter No. MBD-516 driven by one Mohd. Faruk Khan towards Jahangirabad, Truck No. MKW- 7855 coming from opposite direction in high speed dashed the scooterist. As a result, the scooter driver died on the spot. The appellant's left shaft femur was fractured. The Scooter was badly damaged. The appellant was admitted in Gandhi Medical College and Hamidiya Hospital Bhopal. After treatment his leg was plastered. On. 10-8-1994 skin grafting was done over granulating wound. On discharge on 26-8-1994, he was advised to attend OPD on Tuesday/friday after two weeks. But he complained pain and swelling in left thigh and was again admitted on 10-1-1995 for refracture shaft femur for nailing operation. On l-2-1995 operation was performed and 40 cm x 11 mm size nail was passed through Anterolate approach. He was discharged on 14-2-1995, and advised for follow up treatment for a month, Discharge ticket is Ex. P. /125. The injury resulted in Post traumatic painful restriction of knee movement with shortening of left leg by one inch and disfigurement of left thigh. Extent of permanent disabiiity was 50% in the lower limbs. Ex. P/ 132 is the certificate showing this physical handicap.
( 3 ) THE appellant during his treatment as an indoor patient filed' an application for compensation on 28-7-1994 through his counsel and claimed compensation of Rs. 3 lacs under various heads. The owner and drives of the vehicle remained ex parte. The respondent No. 3 the insurer contested the claim. The Tribunal held that accident was caused due to sole negligence of the truck driver, and awarded Rs. 10000/- for expenses incurred treatment, Rs. 2000/- for special diet, Rs. 12000/- for loss of earning for a period of one year, Rs. 30,000/- for permanent disability and Rs. 5,000/- for pain and sufferings, total Rs. 59,000/- with interest thereon at the rate of 12% per annum, from the date of application till payment.
( 4 ) SMT. Shobha menon learned counsel for the appellant submitted that the appellant at the time of accident was aged 45 years and was earning his livelihood on an average Rs. 6,000/- per month. The injury caused due to the motor accident cannot be compensated in terms of money which cannot renew a broken and shattered physical frame. However, in personal injury actions a just compensation should be awarded. Though, the permanent disability is of 50%, but, there is unchallenged testimony of appellant that he now cannot carry on his business of sale of cloth by taking round from place to place. Therefore; considering the circumstances, the reasonable compensation would be as claimed. Counsel cited the case of R. D. Hattangadi v. M/ s. Pest Control (India)Limited, AIR 1995 SC 755.
( 5 ) LEARNED counsel for the respondent/ insurer supported the award of compensation and submitted that the just compensation has been awarded which is not inadequately low so as to call for enhancement. Counsel relied on the decisions in Jai Bhagwan v. Laxman Singh, (1994) 5 SCC 5 nd comparable cases decided by this Court - G. M. Madhya Pradesh State Road Transport Corporation v. Pushpa Devi, 1995 0 ACJ 208, Trilok Chand Anand v. Om Prakash, 1995 ACJ 1057, Mukesh v. Madhya Pradesh State Road Transport Corporation, 1995 ACJ 1083, Sajanbai. v. Illias Mohd. , 1995 ACC CJ 940. and. Prem Narayan Bhatnagar v. Gyan Prakash Bhardwaj, 1995 ACJ 816.
( 6 ) THE task of assessment of damages in personal injury actions is a difficult one. Money cannot renew a broken and shattered physical frame. However, in personal injury actions the award of compensation is made under
