Allowed

Nidhi @ Mona v. Ajeet Kumar Jindal & Ors.

Delhi HC1 Mar 2012MAC.APP./153/2009

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In this motor accident mediation appeal, the High Court allowed the enhancement of compensation from 1,28,645 to 1,54,645 due to aggravation of loss of amenities and non-award for temporary loss of work based on the five-year-old lower court judgment.

What did the court decide?

The ICICI Lombard General Insurance Co. Ltd. is directed to deposit an additional 26,000/- compensation along with interest within six weeks.

Nidhi @ Mona Vs Ajeet Kumar Jindal & Ors. — Delhi HC (2012) — LawSathi Research

¶1

$~37

¶2

* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

¶3

Date of decision: 1st March, 2012

¶4

- MAC. APP. No.153/2009

¶5

NIDHI @ MONA ..... Appellant

¶6

Through: Mr. Manish Maini, Advocate

¶7

Versus

¶8

AJEET KUMAR JINDAL & ORS ..... Respondents Through: Mr. Pankaj Seth, Advocate for the Respondent No.3 Insurance Company.

¶9

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE G.P.MITTAL

¶10

J U D G M E N T

¶11

G. P. MITTAL, J. (ORAL)

¶12

The Appeal is for enhancement of compensation of `1,28,645/awarded to the Appellant for having suffered injuries in an accident which occurred on 09.04.2006.

¶13

The Appellant suffered following injuries:

¶14

“- Serious Head Injury

¶15

Fracture (Right) femur bone (Shaft)

¶16

CLW over left occipital region of Scalp

¶17

MAC. APP. No.153/2009

¶18

Page 1 of 3

¶19

As per CT Scan :- Contusional Hematomas in both basi- frontal Lobes & Right Temporal region, subdural haematoma in occipital region, fracture of occipital bone

¶20

Fracture femur bone treated with I/L Nailing

¶21

Profusely bleeding

¶22

Abrassions and blunt injuries all over body.”

¶23

It is urged by the learned counsel for the Appellant that the Appellant suffered from Paraosmia, a condition which impairs tastes and smell sensation. A certificate Ex.PW2/11 issued by Dr.(Brig) Ved Prakash, Consultant Neurosurgeon to this effect was proved by the Appellant.

¶24

The learned counsel for the Appellant submits that the Appellant was working from home as she was giving tuitions and carrying out medical transcription work on contact basis. She was earning `8,000/- per month. She proved the certificates Exhibits PW2/74 to PW2/78 regarding her qualification, including Oracle Course and a certificate issued by SAR Institute of Medical Transcription, Rohini. It is urged that the Appellant was unable to attend to the work for a period of seven months.

¶25

With the nature of injuries suffered, it can be assumed that the Appellant must have been incapacitated to work for at least two months.

¶26

MAC. APP. No.153/2009

¶27

Page 2 of 3

¶28

The compensation needs to be enhanced. The compensation is re-assessed as under:

¶29

S.No.	Head of Compensation	Granted by the Claims Tribunal	Granted by this Court
1.	Compensation on account of Medicines/Treatment	`76,645/-	`76,645/-
2.	Loss of Amenities in Life	`15,000/-	`25,000/-
3.	Pain and Suffering	`25,000/-	`25,000/-
4.	Conveyance and Special Diet	`12,000/-	`12,000/-
5.	Loss of Work for Two months(`8000 X 2)	-	`16,000/-
	Total	`1,28,645/-	`1,54,645/-

¶30

The overall compensation is thus enhanced from 1,28,645/- to 1,54,645/- which shall carry interest @ 7.5% per annum from the date of filing of the Petition till the date of payment.

¶31

The Respondent No.3 the ICICI Lombard General Insurance Co. Ltd. is directed to deposit the enhanced amount of `26,000/- along with interest within six weeks with the Registrar General of this Court.

¶32

The amount shall be released to the Appellant on deposit.

¶33

The Appeal is allowed in above terms.

¶34

(G.P. MITTAL) JUDGE

¶35

MARCH 01, 2012 pst

¶36

MAC. APP. No.153/2009

¶37

Page 3 of 3

Nidhi @ Mona v. Ajeet Kumar Jindal & Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Nidhi @ Mona v. Ajeet Kumar Jindal & Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Oriental Insurance Co. Ltd. Vs Rakesh Kumar & Ors.

Guddi Vs Phool Singh & Ors.

Ram Chander & Anr. Vs Chakardhari & Ors.

Mohd Israj Vs Dharambir & Ors.

National Insurance Co. Ltd. Vs Gurmeet Singh & Ors.

Kuldeep Singh Bawa & Ors` Vs Tika Ram & Ors.