SUNITA Vs. DARSHAN SINGH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) All the appeals relate to claims from the representatives of the deceased and by the injured persons in a single motor accident. FAO No. 1478 of 2011 relates to claim for death of a child aged 6 years prosecuted at the instance of the mother as a representative and FAO Nos. 1476 and 1485 relate to claims for compensation for injuries suffered by the respective claimants in the accident. It appears that husband of the claimant in FAO No. 1478 has also died. The Tribunal while dismissing the application for claim for death of the child observed that there had been no post-mortem certificate produced for death of the child. The counsel refers to FIR lodged immediately after the accident that records that the fact of death of child Gaurav son of Bittu. Bittu was also a person that died in the same accident. In a case where there is a reference to death of the child in the FIR and the mother of the child has also affirmed the said fact through her evidence, it will be too artificial and harsh to look for any further evidence. Ideally, there must have been a post-mortem certificate as well but I will not discard the evidence of the mother that her child has died.

(2.) For death of child aged 6 years where she had already lost her husband, the loss must have been truly poignant and In my view, the appropriate compensation will be Rs. 2.50 lacs including the component of special damages for loss of child for the mother. The said amount shall also bear interest @ 7.5% from the date of petition till the date of payment. The award stands modified and the appeal is allowed to the above extent.

(3.) The appeal in FAO No. 1476 of 2011 relates to claim for injuries suffered by a claimant Sunita. The contention was that she had suffered a fracture of the mandible, head injury as well as injuries on pelvis. It appears that there had been a surgical intervention for correcting fracture and the Tribunal had awarded a compensation of Rs. 5,000/-. The counsel points out that she had a prolonged treatment and was operated upon but her suffering had not gone and she was seriously traumatized that required a psychiatric assistance as well. On overall consideration, I would think the appropriate compensation shall be Rs. 20,000/-. The amount in excess of what has already been awarded by the Tribunal shall attract interest @ 7.5% from the date of petition till the date of payment. The award stands modified and the appeal is allowed to the above extent. FAO No. 1485 of 2011 relates to claim for compensation for injuries suffered by the claimant for the fracture of left leg and operation had been performed on her. She was treated as an in patient from 04.04.2006 to 07.04.2006. She was admitted again to another operation. I would think that in this case also the compensation could be Rs. 20,000/- against Rs. 5,000/- which is already awarded. The amount in excess of what has already been awarded by the Tribunal shall bear interest @ 7.5% from the date of petition till the date of payment. The award stands modified and the appeal is allowed to the above extent.