5-yr-old gets Rs 1.58L claim for injuries in road accident

A five-year-old girl has been awarded Rs 1.58 lakh compensation by the Thane Motor Accident Claims Tribunal for her injuries in a freak accident in 2013.
Roshani Kamod Kumar, in her claim filed through her father Kamod Kumar Gupta, told the MACT that on January 18, 2013 she was playing near her house at Nerul in Navi Mumbai.
At that time, a car driver moved the vehicle in reverse direction on high speed and dashed against her, as a result of which she sustained multiple grievous injuries.
The tribunal was told that the mishap caused closed right midshaft femur fracture and other injuries to the child, who was just two years old at that time.

An offence was registered with local police and the girl was treated at D Y Patil Hospital.
Her parents spent around Rs 20,000 on her treatment. They said Roshani was a brilliant student having bright future prospects, but the accident caused her permanent disability and affected her working and future earning capacity, for which they claimed Rs 1.50 lakh compensation.

The accident happened due to sole negligence of the car driver, the petitioner claimed, and sought compensation from vehicle owner Sudeep Kumar Ravi Kumar and L&T General Insurance Company.
The car owner did not appear before MACT, and hence the matter was decided ex-parte against him.

The insurance company argued that the girl's father was not an eye witness to the accident and he had also not examined any independent eyewitness. Therefore, the applicant failed to prove negligence on part of the car driver.
MACT member and District Judge K D Vadane said the applicant's contention is corroborated by police papers.
"Therefore, I have no hesitation to come to conclusion that impugned accident occurred due to sole negligence on part of the car driver," he said.
The applicant's counsel submitted that the girl was admitted in hospital and later also took OPD treatment. Her parents spent huge amount on her treatment, but her injuries were not cured and permanent disability to the extent of 39 per cent was caused to her.

However, the judge noted that the doctor who issued
the disability certificate was not her treating doctor. The certificate issued by him was also not in the prescribed form. Therefore, the percentage of disability assessed by the doctor appears to be doubtful.
Taking into consideration the nature of injuries, certainly she has been caused some permanent disability, the judge further observed.
However, nothing has been brought on record to show that the disability caused to the applicant has affected her educational career. In such circumstances, the applicant is not entitled for compensation for future loss of income.
But, taking into consideration the nature of injuries and disability caused, she is entitled for compensation of Rs 40,000 for injuries and disability and Rs 75,000 for loss of marriage prospects, the judge said.

He also granted Rs 8,668 towards medical treatment and medicines, Rs 5,000 each towards special diet, attendance and conveyance and Rs 10,000 each for pain and sufferings, and loss of amenities and expectation of life.
Thus, Judge Vadane recently ordered the vehicle owner and the insurance firm to pay the girl Rs 1,58,668 along with 8 per cent interest from the date of filing of the claim in August 2013.