In an appeal against a Motor Accident Claims Tribunal award, the High Court allowed the claim for enhancement. The court directed the appellant to receive Rs. 40,000 as additional lump sum compensation to account for unawarded salary and loss of efficiency.
Remitted Rs. 40,000 additional composition to be paid in a Lok Adalat.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
M.A. No.100 of 2012
Anil Kumar …. Appellant Versus Sri Sunit Kumar Dutta & Anr. ...Respondents
Coram : The Hon’ble Mr. Justice D.N.Upadhyay
For the Appellant : Mr. R. Anand, Advocate For the Respondents : Mr. P. Kumar, Advocate
08/17.11.2014 This appeal has been preferred by the appellant-claimant for enhancement of the awarded amount.
It is submitted that learned Tribunal has calculated the compensation amount towards lesser side and many aspects required to be considered towards calculating compensation have not been taken care of, such as, salary for the period during which the appellant was under treatment and admitted in the hospital as indoor patient. The medical expenses have also not been properly calculated. A very less amount towards loss and sufferings has been awarded. The appellant happens to be the officer of the Bank and due to the injury sustained, his efficiency to work has also been reduced.
Counsel for the respondent-Insurance Company has opposed the argument and submitted that the disability certificate and the injury sustained indicate that it would not cause efficiency of the appellant in discharging his duty because he is an employee in a Bank and he will have to discharge official work sitting on the table. It is further submitted that no medical bill has been produced by the appellant and, therefore, the Tribunal could not able to calculate the compensation to that account.
Be that as it may, it appears that a total sum of Rs.2,46,000/- with interest @ 6% per annum has been awarded to the appellant.
From perusal of the impugned judgment, it is evident that salary for the period during which the appellant was under treatment has not been awarded.
In the circumstances, I think that Rs.40,000/- as lump sum additional compensation amount, if paid to the appellant, would serve the purpose.
In the circumstances and also after considering the facts and circumstances appearing in the impugned judgment, the respondent-Insurance Company is directed to pay Rs.40,000/-(forty thousand) as lump sum additional compensation amount to the
.2.
appellant, which may be paid in the Lok Adalat likely to be held on 6th December,2014 within the premises of Jharkhand High Court. To ensure the payment, the Insurance Company may deposit the cheque with the Member-Secretary, JHALSA even prior to the date of Lok Adalat.
This appeal is allowed.
( D.N.Upadhyay, J.)
s.b.
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the awarded compensation is sufficient to cover salary during treatment, medical expenses, and loss of efficiency.
Anil Kumar
Sri Sunit Kumar Dutta & Anr.
D.N.Upadhyay
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
