NEW INDIA ASSURANCE COMPANY Vs. SUKH DEV SINGH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The Insurance Company challenges the award of the learned Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Bilaspur granting compensation to the extent of Rs. 4,24,811/- alongwith interest at the rate of 12% per annum from the date of filing the petition till its realization. Each head of compensation has been challenged by the Insurance Company. The accident, out of which this appeal arises, took place on 27.4.1998 when the petitioner was driving a H.R.T.C. bus No. HP-24-4538 from Mandi to Bilaspur. When he reached near Sungal, another bus No. HP-23-2912, coming from the opposite direction, collided with the H.R.T.C. bus causing accident. The petitioner was rushed to the District Hospital, Bilaspur, whereafter to PGI, Chandigarh for further treatment. He remained admitted in PGI, Chandigarh from 27.4.1998 to 21.5.1998 where he was subjected to two surgeries and sent back to Zonal Hospital, Mandi. He remained admitted there from 30.5.1998 to 2.7.1998 and during this period his right leg was operated and amputated below the knee. The petitioner cannot work as a driver and has been appointed as a helper in the HRTC.

(2.) The learned Tribunal on the question of quantum holds that the petitioner was working as driver which task obviously cannot perform after having undergone amputation. It was admitted by the claimant that he was working as a helper and his pay was protected on the last pay drawn as driver, but, he would not be entitled to any increment in future. He would also not be getting any increment thereafter. The salary of a helper is less than that of a driver. The learned Tribunal awards a sum of Rs. 48,811/- as loss suffered for seven months leave when he was undergoing surgery at PGI and Mandi, Rs. 200/- per year as the increment loss, holding that the petitioner was 51 years old and would have retired at the age of 58 years he would have got seven increments of Rs. 200/- per year which would add up to Rs. 67,200/-. Rs. 32,800/- was the loss on account of dearness allowance, The petitioner was getting Rs. 3,000/- per month overtime allowance which he had proved vide Ex. PC, copy of certificate issued by Himachal Road Transport Corporation showing payment of overtime allowance. The learned Tribunal awarded Rs. 1,500/- per month as overtime allowance and taking this for seven years a sum of Rs. 1,26,000/- was awarded. A lump sum amount of Rs. 1,50,000/- was awarded for pain and suffering.

(3.) What has been urged before me is that the Tribunal has been remiss in making this assessment. The disability was only qua one portion of the body and not regarding his whole earning capacity, as such, the claimant has been re-employed and in this eventuality cannot be said to have suffered any loss on account of pain and suffering and the other amounts awarded are not supported by any of the evidence.