EKTA KHAITAN Vs. SITA RAM

JUDGEMENT

(1.) A claim petition was filed by the claimant-appellant on account of the serious injuries sustained by her in a motor accident on 4.10.92. It is alleged that the appellant was going in a bus and the driver of the bus, respondent No. 1 was driving the same rashly and negligently. Consequently, it collided with the truck coming from the opposite direction. In the accident, she sustained serious injuries. Her right leg and right middle finger were amputated. She sustained fractures in both the thigh-bones and left leg bone, and received deep cuts on her forehead and face, which disfigured her face. According to her, she has suffered permanent disablement. Her social life and marriage prospects have been badly affected. The learned Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Ajmer (for short 'the Tribunal') awarded a sum of Rs. 97,213.62 as pecuniary damages and Rs. 1,85,000 as non-pecuniary damages. Thus, an award of total compensation of Rs. 2,82,213.62 has been passed. Feeling aggrieved thereby, the claimant-appellant has preferred this appeal for enhancement of the amount of compensation.

(2.) The Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of R.D. Hattangadi v. Pest Control (India) Pvt. Ltd., 1995 ACJ 366 (SC), has observed as under:

(3.) It cannot be disputed that because of the accident, the appellant, a minor girl, has become lifelong handicapped to the extent that her leg had to be amputated and her thigh-bones were fractured and has received permanent disfigurement on the face. Obviously, no amount of compensation can restore the physical frame of the appellant. Therefore, whenever any amount is determined as the compensation payable for serious injuries and permanent disablement suffered during an accident, the object is to compensate such injuries and the disability so far as the money can compensate because it is impossible to equate the money with the human suffering or personal deprivations. Money cannot renew a broken and shattered physical frame. As Hon'ble Supreme Court has held in the case of R.D. Hattangadi, 1995 ACJ 366 (SC), the determination of the amount of compensation in the cases of accident, it involves some guesswork, some hypothetical consideration, some amount of sympathy linked with the nature of the disability caused. It cannot be lost sight of that the victim of the accident is a girl whose leg has to be amputated and she has suffered a shattered physical frame which would severely affect her social life and prospects of marriage. Her settlement in life has seriously been impaired. Obviously, her disappointment, frustration and mental stress in life is very much great, and she will never be in the normal physical frame. In the case of Rajasthan State Road Transport Corporation v. Hema, S.B. Civil Misc. Appeal No. 547 of 1996, this court vide its order dated 22.11.1997, has approved the award of a sum of Rs. 5,00,000 as non-pecuniary damages for the loss of amenities of life, discomfort, isappointment, frustration and mental stress in life which a minor girl of that age, has suffered on account of the amputation of the leg and other injuries sustained in the accident. Therefore, the non-pecuniary damages in the present case in hand, should be enhanced to Rs. 5,00,000. The Tribunal has awarded pecuniary damages of Rs. 97,213.62, which requires no interference. Therefore, total awardable compensation, comes to Rs. 5,97,213.62. In my opinion, the total amount of compensation is required to be enhanced accordingly.