Allowed

Suman & Ors. v. Reliance Gen. Ins. Co. Ltd. & Ors.

Delhi HC4 Feb 2015MAC.APP./634/2013

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Single Judge enhanced compensation awarded to the Appellant for a permanent disability. The court held that claiming compensation for employing a maid servant was duplicative of the loss of gratuitous services awarded, but directed additional payment for services rendered by family members during hospitalization and recovery.

What did the court decide?

Enhancement of compensation; additional grant of Rs. 6000/- for family member services plus Rs. 38,988/- carrying interest at 7.5% p.a.

Suman & Ors. Vs Reliance Gen. Ins. Co. Ltd. & Ors. — Medical Negligence | Delhi HC (2015)

¶1

Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed By:AM UL YA

¶2

MAC APP 634/2013

¶3

compensation has been awarded to the Appellant towards permanent disability as well as towards employmentof maid servant as the A]3pellant had to engage a maid servant on accountofher inabilityto carry out householdwork. 1 It is statedthat thoughthe ClaimsTribunalgranteda sum ofRs. I 32,988/- towards loss of rendering gratuitous services to the family members for a period of five months, but the same was not added while computingthe compensationin para 28 of the I judgment.

¶4

The Appellant could have moved the Claims Tribunal for correction of the clerical mistake as well as for addition of Rs. 32,988/-not grantedin para 28 as mentionedabove. It may be mentioned that on account of permanent disability, the Appellant was granted compensation for loss of gratuitous services to the extent of 50% and as such, her total loss of earning capacity comes out to be Rs. 6,33,360/-. The claim of compensationat Rs. 2000/- per month for engaging a maid servant will be duplication of the Award. In fact, the 1 assessment of loss of gratuitous services taken by the Claims Tribunal at Rs. 6,33,360/was much more than on a 1 multiplicandof Rs. 2006/- per month which is claimed by the Appellant.

¶5

Similarly,compensationtowards permanentdisabilityand loss of earning capacity on account of permanent disability is the

¶6

MACAPP 634/2013

¶7

Page 2 of 4

¶8

same. Of course, separatecompensationis liable to be granted towards loss of amenities and loss of enjoymentof life which has been duly done by awardingan amountof Rs. 50,000/-. i

¶9

It may be notedi that immediately after the accident, the Appellantwas admitted to Sanjay Gandhi Memorial Hospital. She was then shiftedto SafdarjungHospitalwhere she remained admitted from the period 16^^ August, 2010 to 3"^ September, 2010. The AppellanStwas then shiftedin DhruvHospitalfor the periodfrom 5^^ September,2010 to lO^*" September,2010.

¶10

In the circumstances;the compensationawarded towards pain and suffering and loss of amenities at the rate of Rs. 50,000/each seems to be just and reasonable.

¶11

The Appellant needed an attendant during the period of hospitalisationas also during the recovery period. Though gratuitousserviceswere renderedby some family members,the Appellant cannot be deniedcompensationfor the same.

¶12

Taking into account the injuries suffered, I award a sum of Rs. 6000/- (3000/- X 2) for a period of two months towards the gratuitous services rendered by the family members.

¶13

¶14

The awarded amountis hbnce, enhancedby Rs. 38,988/- which shall [email protected]% per annum from the date of filing of the claim petition till its realisation.

¶15

The appeal is allowed in the above terms.

]

MAC APP 634/2013

Page3of4

The pendingapplicationstandsdisposedof.

(G.P. MITTAL) JUDGE

FEBRUARY 04, 2015 sd

Page 4 of 4

MAC APP 634/2013

Suman & Ors. v. Reliance Gen. Ins. Co. Ltd. & Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Suman & Ors. v. Reliance Gen. Ins. Co. Ltd. & 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

Mahmood Ali Khan & Anr. Vs Arun Kumar Singh & Ors.

United India Insurance Co. Ltd. Vs Jay Devi & Ors.

United India Insurance Co. Ltd. Vs Jay Devi & Ors.

Roshni Devi & Ors. Vs Takdeer Singh & Ors.

Bajaj Allianz General Insurance Co. Ltd. Vs Smt Sarla Katiyar & Ors.

Reliance General Insurance Co. Ltd. Vs Rajeev Kapoor & Ors.