FAO 610/2016

Page 1 of 3

$~8

*

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

%

Date of Decision: 21^st March, 2017

+

FAO 610/2016

NEERAJ KUMAR

...... Appellant

Through:

Mr. Ashish Sharma, Advocate

with appellant in person

versus

JABBAR SINGH & ANR.

..... Respondents

Through:

Respondent No.1 in

person.

Ms. Vandana Surana, Advocate

for respondent No.2

CORAM:

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE J.R. MIDHA

JUDGMENT (ORAL)

1.

The appellant has challenged the impugned order dated 18^th

October, 2016 whereby a compensation of Rs.2,66,533/- has been

awarded to the appellant.

2.

On 16^th March, 2015 at about 08:00 p.m., the appellant was

driving vehicle No.HR-55M-3116 under the employment of

respondent No.1 and he met with an accident with another vehicle

which resulted in fracture of mid shaft bone tibia with intra-medullary

nail and fracture of lower 1/3^rd shaft tibia and mid shaft fibula. The

appellant suffered permanent disability of 43% with respect to both

lower limbs. The vehicle being driven by the appellant was owned by

respondent No.1 and insured with respondent No.2.

3.

The appellant filed application for compensation before the

FAO 610/2016

Page 2 of 3

Commissioner, Employees’ Compensation. The Commissioner,

Employees’ Compensation awarded Rs.2,66,533/- by taking the

functional disability of the appellant as 15%.

4.

Learned counsel for the appellant urged at the time of the

hearing that the functional disability of the appellant be taken up as

100% as he is unable to drive anymore due to permanent disability.

5.

The appellant is present in Court and his condition has been

seen. Dr. Mani Shankar, Senior Medical Officer of Medical and

Health Centre, Delhi High Court has examined the appellant before

this Court. Dr. Mani Shankar is of the view that the functional

disability of the appellant be taken as 50%.

6.

The appellant, present in Court, submits that he is unemployed

after the accident and the finding of the Commissioner, Employees’

Compensation that the appellant was working as a driver after the

accident is misconceived. It is submitted that the finding of the

Commissioner, Employees’ Compensation is based on the statement

of respondent No.1, who was not aware about the employment of the

appellant after the accident.

7.

This Court is of the view that the functional disability of the

appellant be taken as 43% and the appellant is entitled to the

compensation on this basis. Taking the functional disability of the

appellant as 43%, the appellant is entitled to a sum of Rs.4,06,732/-

towards loss on account of 43% functional disability. Adding

Rs.97,605/- towards medical expenses, the appellant is entitled to total

compensation of Rs.5,04,337/-

8.

The appeal is allowed and the award amount is enhanced from

Rs.2,66,533/- to Rs. Rs.5,04,337/- along with interest @ 12% per

annum from 17^th March, 2015 upto realisation.

FAO 610/2016

Page 3 of 3

9.

The enhanced award amount be deposited by respondent No.2

with UCO Bank, Delhi High Court Branch by means of a cheque

drawn in the name of UCO Bank A/c Neeraj Kumar within four

weeks.

10.

List for disbursement of the enhanced award amount on 05^th

May, 2017.

11.

The appellant shall remain present in Court on the next date of

hearing along with the passbook of his savings bank account near the

place of his residence as well as PAN Card.

12.

Copy of this judgement be given dasti to counsels for the parties

under signatures of the Court Master.

MARCH 21, 2017

rsk

J.R. MIDHA, J.