- (1.) HEARD the learned counsel appearing for the appellant. In this appeal by the appellant -Insurance Company, the quantum of compensation awarded by the Motor Vehicle Accident Claims Tribunal, Dhanbad in Title (Motor Vehicle) Suit No. 72 of 2003 has been challenged.
(2.) THE claimant -injured is a medical practioner in Bharat Coking Coal Limited. On the unfateful date of accident while the claimant was coming from Hospital by his Maturi Car he was dashed by a damper bearing registration No. BRY -9225, which was insured with the appellant -Insurance Company. The claimant stated to be got injury in his right leg and was admitted to Central Hospital, Dhanbad for treatment. The said hospital referred him to Indraprasth Apolo Hospital, New Delhi where he remained hospitalized from 25.02.2002 to 19.05.2002. The claimant 'scase is that because of the accident, he was not in a position to move without the help of Baisakhi. Evidence was led with regard to the loss sustained by the claimant. The Tribunal after hearing the parties awarded a total sum of Rs. 8,77,300/ -on the following heads: (a) Compensation for fracture of bone and permanent disablement of 45 % Rs. 15,000/ - (b) Compensation of salary for ten months from 19.02.2002 to 5.12.2002 Rs. 4,12,300/ - (c) Loss of future income Rs. 1,50,000/ - (d) Convenience charges Rs. 50,000/ - (e) Expenses towards attendant and driver Rs. 2,00000/ - (f)Extra nourishment and food Rs. 50000/ - Total amount Rs. 8,77,300/ - (rupees eight lacs sevnty seven thousand and three hundred only) Learned counsel appearing for the appellant -Insurance Company submitted that the compensation awarded is highly excessive and exorbitant in as much as after the claimant was fully recovered he joined his duty with an enhanced salary of the i.e. from Rs. 37,000/ -to Rs. 41,230/ -.
(3.) FROM perusal of the judgment, the facts which are not disputed by the Insurance Company is that because of the serious grievous injury the claimant hospitalized in Apolo Hospital, New Delhi for the aforesaid period and underwent several operations. Finally his right leg became short by two inches. The claimant in his evidence has stated that because of shorting of leg, he is not in a position to move properly and he was feeling difficulty in sitting. He further deposed that he could not walk without the help of other person and cannot climb stair without the help of other persons. He further deposed that due to accident he was unable to do heavy work and cannot drive the vehicle and he engaged a driver for a monthly salary of Rs. 2500/ -He further deposed that he was advised for endoscope surgery costing more than Rs. 2,00,000/, -the said money has not been paid by the Insurance Company. Taking into consideration all these uncontroverted evidence made by the claimant and the witnesses the Tribunal awarded the compensation on different heads.;