FAO No. 3689 of 2008 1
In the High Court for the States of Punjab and Haryana at Chandigarh
...
FAO No. 3689 of 2008
Date of decision: December 8, 2009
Pepsu Road Transport Corporation
..Appellant
Versus
Gurcharan Singh and another
..Respondents
Coram: Hon’ble Mr. Justice Rakesh Kumar Garg
Present: Mr. Harsh Aggarwal, Advocate
for the appellant.
Mr. S.S. Godara, Advocate
for the respondents.
,,,
Rakesh Kumar Garg,J(Oral)
This is owner’s appeal challenging the impugned award whereby
respondent No.1 has been granted compensation to the tune of Rs.12,59,000/-
for the multiple and grievous injuries caused to him on account of rash an
negligent driving of the offending vehicle driven by respondent No.2 and owned
by the appellant.
It is not in dispute that findings of the Tribunal qua the negligence
of the offending vehicle and its driver have become final against the appellant in
FAO No.3688 of 2008 decided on 22.7.2009.
Learned counsel for the appellant in this case has challenged the
findings of the Tribunal on the question of quantum of compensation alone. It is
not in dispute that the respondent-claimant had suffered 100 % disability of the
limb i.e., his left leg was amputated from left thigh. The treatment taken and the
money spent on that account has been duly proved on the record by the
claimant-respondent. In fact, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the
appellant was unable to dispute the payment of amount of Rs. 6,54,000/-
granted to the respondent on account of medical expenses.
FAO No. 3689 of 2008 2
A perusal of the impugned award would show that the respondent-
claimant has been awarded the compensation under different heads as under:-
" a) Pain and sufferings Rs. 1,00,000/-
b) Permanent disability Rs. 2,00,000/-
c) Amount spent on medicines Rs. 6,54,000/-
d) Loss of income during the Rs. 2,60,000/-
period of treatment.
e) Special Diet Rs. 30,000/-
f) Attendant Charges Rs. 15,000/-
Rs.12,59,000/-
After deducting the amount of Rs. 6,54,000/-, which was spent on
medical expenses, the respondent has been granted a sum of Rs. 6,05,000/-
under the other different heads. It may also be pointed out here that ample
evidence has come on record that the respondent-appellant has suffered a great
pain and agony because of the permanent disability suffered by him. The
respondent-claimant has to remain admitted in various hospitals with effect from
17.8.2005 to 6.9.2005 and thereafter, on the advice of the doctors, to the Higher
Centre for Management of Narcotizing the fascitis and myositis. Thereafter, he
remained admitted for about 4 months as indoor patient in C.M.C. Ludhiana and
after the discharge from CMC Ludhiana, he remained as OPD patient for follow
up treatment for about six months. Thereafter he started treatment as an indoor
patient from Maharaja Aggarsain Medical College, Agroha Hissar from
28.11.2006 to 5.2.2007 when his left leg was amputated from left thigh. Not only
this, even thereafter, the respondent-appellant has to take the follow up
treatment and spent money on medicines, treatment, investigation,
hospitalization, transportation, special diets and attendant etc.
It may also be pointed out here that no rebuttal evidence was led by
the appellant to deny the compensation claimed by the claimant. Thus, keeping
in view the pain and sufferings of the respondent-claimant, his permanent
disability, transportation, investigation, hospitalization, special diets and
FAO No. 3689 of 2008 3
attendants etc. and also the fact that because of amputation of his left leg,the
respondent-claimant has become useless and cannot even walk, what to talk of
earning his livelihood, the Tribunal has granted the compensation under various
heads stated above.
I find no reason to differ with the aforesaid amount of compensation
granted by the Tribunal.
Dismissed.
December 8, 2009 (RAKESH KUMAR GARG)
nk JUDGE