SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

DELHI HIGH COURT
RAMESH CHAND – Appellant
Versus
SUBHASH CHAND & ORS – Respondent
MACAPP-58_2008



MAC.APP.58/2008

Page 1 of 6

$~28

*

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

%

Date of Decision: 18th November, 2016

+

MAC.APP. 58/2008

RAMESH CHAND

..... Appellant

Through:

Mr. Pankaj Kumar, Advocate

versus

SUBHASH CHAND & ORS

..... Respondents

Through:

Mr. J.P.N. Shahi, Mr.Pankaj

Seth, Advocates for respondent

no.3.

CORAM:

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE J.R. MIDHA

JUDGMENT (ORAL)

1.

The appellant has challenged the award of the Claims Tribunal

whereby the compensation of Rs.2,29,830/- has been awarded to the

appellant. The appellant is seeking enhancement of the award amount.

2.

The accident dated 13th October, 2004 resulted in multiple

laceration on the chin, loss of maxilla, ectropian eyelid, laceration

upper/lower lip, stiff shoulder and neck, chest wall disfigured,

tightness of auxiliary fold, limited abduction, facial asymmetry, grade

II rhinolalia, cold intolerance over forehead, (left side) face crushed,

bone exposed, avulsion of tissue, inability to eat, recurrent ulceration

(left) foot, reduced vision, dry eye, ectropion (left) lower eyelid,

reduced shoulder (left) mont (overhead induction), itching of grafted

donor area, ectropion (left) lower eyelid and epiphora, congestion

2016:DHC:7536

MAC.APP.58/2008

Page 2 of 6

lower forms and bulbar conjunctiva, globe dystopia, oroantral fistula

communication to exterior, loss of lip alveolus lipsel absent, pect

major flap is covering lat maxilla, inability to close left eye, difficulty

in breathing from left nostril, inability to blow air from mouth due to

incompetent peri oral muscles, inability to chew food due to lack of

left upper alveolus, drooling of saliva, inability to completely abduct

left upper limb , deformity at donor site at left side chest, dorsum of

left foot, scar over left iliac crest region noted and difficulty in

opening mouth.

3.

The appellant was admitted to Safdarjung Hospital on 26th

April, 2005 and was discharged on 17th May, 2005. He was again

admitted on 8th May, 2006 and was discharged on 12th June, 2006.

The appellant was again admitted on 27th November, 2006 and was

discharged on 4th December, 2006 from Lok Nayak Hospital. The

appellant underwent nine surgeries for which he remained in hospital

for 181 days. The appellant lost his job and cannot eat solid diet. The

appellant is unable to close his left eye and there is disfigurement of

his face and chest. He is unable to move his left shoulder.

4.

The injuries suffered by the appellant resulted in 31.5 %

permanent disability relating to nose, cheek, upper lip, eye, alveolus,

chest, upper limb, iliac crest, foot of left side and left lower lid

cicatricial ectropion leading to post traumatic disfigurement of face,

eye (left), chest, foot and restriction of (left) upper limbs movements.

5.

The Claims Tribunal awarded Rs.2,29,830/- as per the break up

given hereunder:-

Medical expenses

:

Rs.

32,330.00

Pain and sufferings

:

Rs. 1,00,000.00

2016:DHC:7536

MAC.APP.58/2008

Page 3 of 6

Special Diet

:

Rs.

20,000.00

Conveyance

:

Rs.

10,000.00

Loss of earnings

:

Rs.

67,500.00

Total

:

Rs. 2,29,830.00

6.

Learned counsel for the appellant urged at the time of hearing

that the Claims Tribunal has not awarded any compensation for

disfiguration and loss of amenities of life. Although the appellant’s

face has been totally disfigured, the Claims Tribunal did not award

even a single rupee to the appellant as compensation for disfiguration.

The Claims Tribunal has also not awarded any compensation for loss

of earning capacity on the basis of permanent disability suffered by

the appellant. The compensation awarded by the Claims Tribunal

under the head of pain and sufferings is on the lower side. The Claims

Tribunal has not awarded any compensation for future treatment. It is

further submitted that the appellant could not afford private medical

treatment. It is further submitted that the Claim

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top