B G ARAVINDU Vs. K MANIKYA RAO

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The appellant who was involved in an accident with a lorry suffered crush injury on the 4th toe of her left foot, fracture of the superior ramus of the left pubic bone and fracture of the proximal and middle phalanges of the 4th toe of the left leg.lShe claimed a sum of Rs.13,300 ttowards general damages and Rs.1,700 towards special damages. The Tribunal allowed Rs.2,250 under the head of general damages and Rs 500 under the head of special damages. The appellant has claimed enhancement of the damages so awarded by the Tribunal in this appeal.

(2.) Since the respondents have neither filed any appeal against the award nor have they challenged the culpability regarding the accident, we are in this appeal concerned only with the consideration of the adequacy of the quantum of damages awarded by the Tribunal.

(3.) Dealing first with the quantum of compensation awarded under the head 'general damages', it may be observed that the amount of Rupees 2,250 awarded by the Tribunal is grossly inadequate when the same is considered in comparison with the amount awarded in comparable cases by the Courts. One such case finds mention in Municipal Corpn of Delhi v. Shanti Devi Dutt(1) wherein injuries suffered by the claimant in comparison with the injuries of the present appellant were very minor, the same being just bruises and swelling and no fracture, whereas in the present case the appellant suffered fracture on the very vital bone of her body as also the 4th toe of the left foot. The pain and suffering that she must have undergone must have been considerable. Further the Doctor, PW.l, in his ev)dence had opined that the appellant had suffered permanent defor- mity of her 4th toe and that she might have to undergo an operation for removing the hematoma developed on the toe causing the aforesaid defor- mity and if the operation failed she might have to wear a special shot for her life.