Read Time: 06 minutes
The court noted “If PTSD condition of the claimant would have been direct result of the road traffic accident, he would have certainly laid a claim in this regard at the earliest and not after six years of the accident”
The Jammu and Kashmir and Ladakh High Court has dismissed a claim seeking enhanced compensation for the loss of future income and the capability to drive due post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD) resulting from a road accident.
The court, presided over by Justice Sanjay Dhar, made the decision while hearing an appeal filed against the award of compensation passed by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Srinagar.
The appellant, Ghulam Ahmad Sumji, was involved in a motor vehicle accident on February 16, 2012, at Pattan. Sumji, who was driving a passenger vehicle, suffered injuries when his vehicle was hit by another vehicle. Following the accident, Sumji filed a claim petition with the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal in Srinagar, seeking Rs. 20 lakh in compensation for injuries, medical expenses, and loss of income due to his inability to continue working as a driver.
The respondents, including the owner, driver, and insurer of the offending vehicle, contested the claim. They admitted the vehicle's ownership and insurance coverage but argued that the accident resulted from Sumji's negligence. The insurer also contended that the driver of the offending vehicle did not hold a valid driving license at the time of the accident.
The Tribunal determined that the accident was caused by the negligence of the offending vehicle's driver and assessed Sumji's monthly income at Rs. 10,000. It awarded compensation for temporary disability, medical expenses, pain and suffering, and other costs, totalling Rs. 1,35,153, with 7.5% annual interest. However, it did not award compensation for loss of future earning capacity.
Sumji appealed for an enhanced compensation of Rs. 11,49,600, arguing that he suffered from PTSD and thus could no longer work as a driver. He relied on the testimony of Dr. Aijaz Ahmad Suhaff, who diagnosed him with PTSD in 2018, six years after the accident.
The court reviewed the evidence and found no substantial link between the accident that occurred in 2012 and Sumji's PTSD diagnosis in 2018. The court noted “If PTSD condition of the claimant would have been direct result of the road traffic accident, he would have certainly laid a claim in this regard at the earliest and not after six years of the accident.”
Additionally, the court also found Sumji did not initially claim PTSD in his petition. The court observed “at the time of filing of the claim petition, the appellant has not even pleaded that he is suffering from any psychiatric disorder. It was only during pendency of the claim petition that he produced the certificate issued by Dr. Aijaz Ahmad Suhaff and projected the claim regarding loss of future income before the Tribunal on account of PTSD. This appears to be an afterthought.”
The court concluded that the Tribunal had appropriately assessed the compensation and there was no ground to interfere with its observations and findings.
Conclusively, the appeal for enhanced compensation based on PTSD was dismissed, reaffirming the Tribunal's original award and findings.
Cause Title: GHULAM AHMAD SUMJI v NAZIR AHMAD BHAT & ORS. [Mac Appeal No.01/2020]
Please Login or Register
