DHARAM SINGH Vs. BRAHAM DASS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The present Regular Second Appeal under Sec. 100 of the Code of Civil Procedure is maintained by the appellant against the judgment and decree dated 29.3.2006, passed by the learned Additional District Judge, Presiding Officer, Fast Track Court, Hamirpur, in Civil Appeal No.12 of 2000/303 of 2004, whereby the learned Appellate Court has affirmed the judgment and decree passed by learned Civil Judge (Junior Division), Court No.1, Hamirpur, in Civil Suit No.82 of 1992, dated 26.11.1999.

(2.) Briefly stating facts giving rise to the present appeal are that respondent/plaintiff (hereinafter referred to as 'the plaintiff') filed a suit for recovery of Rs.1,00,000.00 against the appellant/defendant (hereinafter referred to as 'the defendant') on account of the damages suffered by him due to the act and conduct of the defendant. It is averred that plaintiff's father late Shri Basant Ram, was murdered by the defendant intentionally on 11.5.1991 and defendant caused grievous and dangerous injuries to the plaintiff, as a result of which, he has become handicapped from his right hand and unable to work. Due to these grievous and dangerous injuries suffered by him, he remained in District Hospital, Hamipur, from where he was referred to IGMC, Shimla and further referred to Chandigarh, for treatment and for this travelling, he had to spend about Rs.14,000.00 in all including the treatment. In addition to it, he had to spend about Rs.10,000.00 for performing the last rites of his father, who was murdered by the defendant. It has been further averred that his deceased father was able bodied person, being Carpenter, earning Rs.70.00 per day. The father of the plaintiff suffered loss of income approximately amounting to Rs.20,000.00 to Rs.25,000.00. Plaintiff has also claimed that the act and conduct of the defendant rendered the plaintiff, as handicapped seeking medical advise and so, unable to earn his livelihood as Carpenter, as the plaintiff has claimed to be earning Rs.70.00 per day before the occurrence and in addition to that the plaintiff has been forced to seek medical treatment and thereby suffered loss of Rs.25,000.00, by getting treatment in PGI, Chandigarh, as the plaintiff has to be accompanied by one attendant for coming and going to PGI, Chandigarh. The plaintiff has also claimed to have suffered mental agony and torture, as he has been deprived of the love and affection of his father and thereby the plaintiff has claimed total damages of Rs.1,00,000.00 from the defendant. The plaintiff has further averred that the defendant was tried and sentence to life imprisonment for an offence punishable under Sec. 302 of the Indian Penal Code as well as under Sec. 326 of the Indian Penal Code.

(3.) The suit was resisted and contested by raising preliminary objections qua limitation and cause of action. On merits, it has been contended that the defendant has denied the factum of committing murder to the father of the plaintiff as well as causing injuries to the plaintiff. However, the defendant has admitted the relationship between of the plaintiff and his father. The defendant has also denied the capacity to earn to the father of the plaintiff as well as to the plaintiff. The defendant has denied that the plaintiff and his father were working as Carpenter and claimed that the plaintiff was living separately from his deceased father. There is no question of depriving the plaintiff from the earning of his father as well as the loss of any love and affection. The defendant has admitted that in a case of murder registered against him, he has been convicted and sentenced to undergo life imprisonment, but the appeal against the same is pending before Honourable Apex Court. The defendant has denied any liability to pay any damages to the plaintiff.