HANS RAJ Vs. NATIONAL INSURANCE CO LTD

JUDGEMENT

(1.) HEARD learned counsel for the parties.

(2.) APPELLANT being dis-satisfied with the quantum of compensation in case of 100% disability has filed this appeal questioning the correctness of quantum of compensation. The appellant met with an accident on 10. 4. 1996 when he was coming from Govindpura to Shahpura by road. He was hit from behind by Truck No. DL-1g-A-618 which was being driven by respondent No. 3 in rash and negligent manner. As a result of the said accident, appellant sustained grievious injuries and he had to remain hospitalized in S. M. S. Hospital Jaipur for more than a month. He was subjected to operation during his hospitalization. Since appellant had sustained fracture of his back bone at Vertribra Section at L-1, both his legs were rendered senseless and this disease was described by the doctors attending on him as `paraplegia'. Medical Board upon examining him, certified that appellant sustained 100% permanent disability. The injury report Ex. 9, X-Ray Report Ex. 4, permanent disability certificate, operation note and the statement of AW1 Dr. M. K. Mathur were got exhibited.

(3.) SHRI Ganesh Joshi, learned counsel appearing for the Insurance Company opposed the appeal and submitted that there was no proof of the income of the appellant and mere production of the driving license cannot be a substitute for that proof. Appellant was required to prove before the Court that he was regularly earning Rs. 100/- per day and the Tribunal could be only then required to calculate on the basis of such income. Learned counsel for the Insurance Co. argued that in absence of proof of income, even if notional income of Rs. 15,000/- as provided in clause (vi) of Schedule-II supra is relied on, the amount of compensation would come almost to the equivalent amount already awarded to the appellant on application of the correct multiplier at the age of 20 years which is 16 i. e. Rs. 2,40,000/- which when deducted by 1/3rd, would be less than Rs. 2 lacs when compensation awardable on the head of pain and suffering and mental agony is added thereof, amount of compensation would almost come to the same as has actually been awarded. Learned counsel argued that even otherwise, learned Tribunal has awarded enormous amount of compensation to the appellant for medical expenses. While there was no proof of medical expenses incurred by the appellant, yet, the Tribunal has awarded Rs. 30,000/- under the said head.