KRISHAN LAL Vs. AMIT KUMAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE claim is for compensation for injuries suffered in a motor accident for a male aged 54 years. He was said to be engaged in business and an income tax assessee. He had crush injury below his knee and his leg had been amputated. He had also multiple fractures on the other leg and injuries on various parts of his body. The fracture was reduced by an implant of rod. The claimant contended that he would require also additional expenses for an artificial limb and had filed an application CM No. 2322 -CII of 2013 to accept the evidence setting out the details that an artificial limb will cause Rs.2,83,200/ -.

(2.) IT is most important that there is an appropriate evidence lead even at the time of filing about the likely expenses in future. A person who has an artificial limb cannot say that he did not know nature of expenses that would be incurred in future. I cannot allow for an additional evidence to be brought without affording an opportunity to the other side to controvert that is contained in the document. Additional evidence cannot also be given without explaining why such evidence could not be produced before the tribunal. I shall not be able to accommodate the claim on the basis of the document brought but however I made an attempt to re - work the compensation taking all the relevant factors that include also a claim for future medical expenses. They are tabulated as under: -