2016(5) Law Herald (P&H) 4588 : 2016 LawHerald.Org 1224

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA

Before

The Hon’ble Mr. Justice Darshan Singh

FAONo.1255of2013

Ramandeep Singh

v.

Sucha Singh & Ors.

Decided on 16/02/2016

For the Appellant:                     Mr. Vikram Bali, Advocate.

For the Respondent No.3:         Mr. Vipul Sharma, Advocate for Mr. Paul S. Saini, Advocate.

  • Motor Vehicles Act, 1988, S.166–Accident»Disability @ 15%–As per the disability
    certificate, the claimant has suffered 25% disability-He has a limp and stiffness in
    the right knee-He has difficulty in squatting and sitting cross-legged-Functional
    disability assessed @ 15%. (Para 6)
  • Motor Vehicles Act, 1988, S.166–Accident-Disability–Future loss of earning cannot
    be assessed on the basis of percentage of the permanent disability but that has to
    be assessed on the basis of percentage of functional disability i.e. effect or impact
    of such permanent disability on his earning capacity.
    (Para 6)

CASE CITED:

  1. Raj Kumar v. Ajay Kumar, 2011(1) Law Herald (SC) 644. (Para 6)

JUDGMENT

Mr. Darshan Singh, J.:- The present appeal has been preferred against the award dated 20.10.2012 passed by the learned Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Panchkula (hereinafter called the Tribunal), vide which the appellant-claimant has been awarded the compensation to the tune of Rs.53,467/- along with interest @ 7.5.% per annum on account of the injuries suffered by him in the motor vehicular accident, which took place on 30.11.2006.

  1. The present appeal has been preferred by the appellantclaimant for enhancement of the
    amount of compensation.
  2. Learned counsel for the appellant-claimant contended that the claimant has suffered 25%
    permanent disability due to the injuries suffered by him in this accident, but the learned
    Tribunal has awarded only Rs.30,000/- in lump sum on account of the loss of enjoyment and
    basic amenities on account of the disability suffered by the claimant. He contended that the
    compensation has not been calculated taking into consideration the income of the deceased
    and by applying the suitable multiplier.
  3. On the other hand, learned counsel for the respondent contended that the claimant was
    only a student at the time of the accident. So, he was not having any income. The
    learned Tribunal has rightly awarded the compensation under this head. He further
    contended that the compensation awarded by the learned Tribunal under all the heads
    is just and appropriate.

5. I have duly considered the aforesaid contentions.

  1. At the time of the accident, the claimant was doing the Diploma in Engineering. No doubt, he being a student was having no income but in order to assess the compensation on account of the permanent disability suffered by him, the learned Tribunal was required to take into consideration his notional income. In view of the fact thai the claimant was doing the diploma in engineering. So, the notional income of the claimant is taken to be Rs.3000/ – per month i.e. Rs.36,000/- per annum. As per the disability certificate Ex.P1, the claimant has suffered 25% disability. He has a limp and stiffness in the right knee. He has difficulty in squatting and sitting cross-legged. The Hon’ble Apex Court in case Raj Kumar Vs. Ajay Kumar and another, /2011(1) Law Herald (SC) 644J: 2011ACJ 1 has laid down that future loss of earning cannot be assessed on the basis of percentage of the permanent disability but that has to be assessed on the basis of percentage of functional disability i.e. effect or impact of such permanent disability on his earning capacity. In that case the claimant has suffered 45% permanent disability but the Hon’ble Apex Court has considered the permanent functional disability to the extent of 25% and loss of future earning capacity as 20%. In view of the aforesaid ratio of law laid down by Hon’ble Apex court, the functional disability effecting the future earning capacity of the claimant is taken to be 15%. He was 16 years of age. So, the multiplier of 18 shall be applicable. Thus, the amount of compensation on account of permanent disability suffered by the claimant in the accident comes to Rs.97,2007- (36,000 x 15 x 18/100). So, the amount of compensation under this head is enhanced from Rs.30,000/- to Rs.97,200/- raising the total amount of compensation to Rs.1,20,667/-.
  2. Thus, keeping in view my aforesaid discussion, the present appeal is hereby partly allowed. The amount of compensation is enhanced to Rs.1,20,667/- from Rs.53,467/- as awarded by the learned Tribunal. The claimant shall be entitled to interest on the enhanced amount from the date of filing the petition till realization @ 7.5% per annum i.e. the rate of interest as awarded by the learned Tribunal. The liability to pay the enhanced amount shall remain as determined by the learned Tribunal in the main award.