RAJENDRA SINGH Vs. KULDEEP MOHAN SAHAI AND OTHERS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Claimant has preferred this appeal dissatisfied with award dated 01.08.2005 of learned Additional District Judge (Fast Track) No.7, Jaipur City, Jaipur, in MAC Case No.60/2004, by which learned Tribunal awarded compensation of Rs.76,000/- in an injury claim and has prayed for enhancement of compensation

(2.) Learned counsel for the appellant has argued that learned Tribunal has awarded compensation of Rs.30,000/- for 10% permanent disability sustained by claimant in the motor accident. Permanent disability was caused because of the accident due to which right temporal bone of the appellant got fractured and was crushed into pieces. A bone piece in the size of 2"x2" was completely removed. He was subjected to surgery twice and remained hospitalized for 17 days. He remained confined to bed for three months. Learned counsel submitted that the disability certificate (Exhibit-24) has been issued by Medical Board consisting of three Doctors of Satelite Hospital, Sethi Colony, Jaipur, and therein the permanent disability has been assessed to the extent of 10%. Learned counsel referred to the statement of AW-2 Radhey Shyam Yadav, the owner of tailoring-shop running in the name and style 'Yadav Wears', where the appellant used to work. This witness has stated that the appellant used to stitch six pieces of pants daily. Now his working capacity has been substantially reduced and he is able to stitch only three pieces of pants. This witness further stated that he was paying approximately Rs.5000/- per month to the appellant. Learned counsel also referred to statement of AW-3 Rajendra Singh, claimant himself, who has proved this fact that he was initially hospitalized on 22.07.2002, the date of accident. Thereafter he was discharged on 01.08.2002, then again he remained hospitalized from 05.08.2002 to 07.08.2002. This witness further stated that he was subjected to surgery on 07.06.2004 and a plate was inserted into his skull and he was discharged on 22.07.2004. He has proved various medical bills and the hospital documents. He has stated that he used to earn Rs.200/- per day out of tailoring work. For such a long period, he remained hospitalized and confined to bed and due to the accident his working capacity has been substantially reduced. His memory has also gone weak. Learned counsel has also referred to statement of Dr. Satish Gupta (AW-3), who has proved the fact that due to the accident the injured sustained 10% permanent disability and a piece of his right temporal bone in the size of 2"x2" was missing as a result of which the appellant would regularly get headache and there is apprehension that in case of any slight injury to his brain, it may affect his brain matter. It is therefore prayed that the appellant should be awarded compensation on the basis of multiplier method taking into consideration his age of 30 years and also should be awarded reasonable amount of compensation on the head of pain and suffering, and he should be also paid compensation for loss of income for four months, whereas learned Tribunal has awarded compensation for loss of income only for one month.

(3.) Shri S.R. Joshi, learned counsel for respondent insurance company opposed the appeal and submitted that a sum of Rs.76,000/- has been paid as compensation to the appellant way back in the year 2005, the time when the rupee carried more value than prevalent at the present time, therefore it should be accepted that the value of the amount of Rs.7,6000/- should be equal to Rs.2,00,000/- in the present time. Learned counsel submitted that it is because there was a fracture of right temporary bone does not mean that there would be any reduction in working capacity of the claimant. The amount that has been paid is just and reasonable and does not call for any interference. The appeal be therefore dismissed.