In FAO No.4406 of 2018-PUNJ HC- Appellant who is totally confined to bed would be entitled to attendant charges: P&H HC enhances compensation awarded to bedridden motor accident victim by Rs 13.6 lakh 
Justice Alka Sarin [17-04-2023]

 

Read Order: KRISHAN KUMAR VS ANIL KUMAR AND OTHER

Mansimran Kaur

Chandigarh, April 20, 2023: By enhancing the compensation amount by Rs 13, 60,868 and  modifying the award of the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, the Punjab and Haryana High Court has allowed an appeal instituted by the injured  appellant.

A  Single- Judge bench of Justice Alka Sarin said, “Keeping in view the fact that the claimant-appellant is confined to bed and has undergone immense mental shock and agony, accordingly the amount is enhanced to Rs.5 lakhs.”

The Tribunal on the basis of the evidence on the record had awarded a total compensation to the tune of Rs. 45, 63,251.

The Counsel for the claimant-appellant submitted that the Tribunal had assessed the annual income of the claimant-appellant as Rs.2, 48,521/- per annum and had applied a multiplier of 9. 

It was contended  that since it was  a case of 100% permanent disability, the future prospects also ought to have been applied and since the age of the claimant-appellant at the time of the accident was 56 years, hence, an addition of 10% ought to have been made towards future prospects. It was further contended  that the amount awarded under the heads Attendant Charges, Pain and Suffering, Special Diet and Transportation are also on the lower side.

After considering the submissions of the parties, the Court noted  that in the present case undisputedly, as per the disability certificate,  the claimant-appellant suffered 100% permanent disability on account of a head injury with weakness of left side of body with incontinence of urine and stool. The claimant-appellant was rendered bedridden and till date his condition was the same, the Court noted. 

A knee brace was also applied for left hip fracture and dislocation by an orthopaedic surgeon. Post operatively the claimant-appellant was on ventilator support, the Court further noted. 

Further reference was made to the judgment in Pappu Deo Yadav Vs. Naresh Kumar & Ors, wherein it was held that individual factors are of crucial importance which are to be borne in mind while determining the extent of permanent disablement, for the purpose of assessment of loss of earning capacity.

In view of the same, the Court opined that the Tribunal ought to have made an addition of 10% towards future prospects keeping in view the age of the claimant-appellant. 

Another reference was made to the case of  Abhimanyu Partap Singh Vs. Namita Sekhon & Anr. , wherein the Apex Court had  assessed the attendant charges for the injured who was totally confined to the bed as Rs.5000/- per month for whole life, calculating the compensation applying a multiplier of 18. 

In the present case the minimum wage at the time of the accident i.e in the year 2015 was Rs.5,812/- per month and hence the appellant who was  totally confined to bed would be entitled to attendant charges @ Rs.5,812.75 rounded off to Rs.5,900 x 12 (Rs.70,800/- per annum) x 9 i.e the multiplier applicable in the present case, the Court noted. 

The Tribunal awarded compensation of Rs.1 lakh under the head Pain and Sufferings. Keeping in view the fact that the claimant-appellant was confined to bed and had undergone immense mental shock and agony, accordingly the amount was enhanced to Rs.5 lakhs. The amount awarded under the head Medicines and Treatment was maintained. The amount awarded under the head Costs of Transportation and Special Diet was also maintained. An amount of Rs.1 lakh was awarded by the Tribunal under the head Loss of Amenities, which was on the lower side. In view of the same, the Court noted that considering the vegetative condition of the claimant-appellant, the said amount needs to be enhanced to Rs.2 lakhs. 

The enhanced amount of Rs.13, 60,868/- over and above the amount already awarded by the Tribunal shall carry interest @ 7.5% per annum from the date of filing of the claim petition till realization, the Court observed. 

In view of such discussion, the appeal was allowed and the award passed by the Tribunal was modified accordingly.