1. The only argument advanced by Mr. N.L Jain, learned counsel for the appellant, in this appeal is that the learned single Judge should not have awarded a sum of Rs. 10,000/- for expenses incurred in connection with treatment including expenses on medicines, diet and conveyance etc. The contention of the learned counsel is that no bills for purchase of medicines or other vouchers or accounts have been produced by the claimant in support of his claim under the head medical expenses. Learned counsel laid special emphasis on the fact that the claimant was a bank official.
2. The claimant had advanced a claim for a sum of Rs. 15,000/- on account of medical expenses including the cost of medicines, consultation with doctors, nutritious diet and conveyance expenses. The Tribunal accepted the contention advanced on behalf of the Rajasthan State Road Transport Corporation that the claimant being a senior bank official he should have produced the accounts or the supporting vouchers in respect of the amount claimed under the head medical expenses and disallowed the claim so far as this head was concerned.
3. The learned single Judge, however, held that compensation could not be refused to the claimant on the technical ground that the statement of expenses or bills or vouchers were not produced and he allowed a sum of Rs. 10,000/- under this head. The finding recorded by the learned single Judge in this respect has been challenged in this appeal.
4. It is undisputed that the claimant was working as a bank manager. It is also undisputed that as a result of the accident there has been a partial permanent disablement of his right arm. It is also in evidence that the claimant had to undergo medical treatment for over two years. The statement of the claimant discloses that he was an indoor patient for a total period of 46 days 16 X-ray plates were taken. Out of which 4 have been produced on the record. Undoubtedly it would have been better if the claimant would have produced the bills in support of the purchase of medicines or some account showing the expenses incurred in purchasing the medicines, injections and medical consultation, for purchase of nutritious diet and the expenses incurred on conveyance and travelling. It is also in evidence that the claimant underwent treatment at Jaipur as well as at Chandigarh. Even if the bills or vouchers or the statement of accounts have not been produced by the claimant, award of reasonable damages under the head medical expenses cannot be refused. It has not been denied that the claimant must have spent some amount in respect of purchase of medicines, injections, for consulting the doctors at Jaipur and Chandigarh and for conveyance and travelling and for purchase of nutritious diet. It has not come on record that the claimant kept any account during the period of two years when he was under treatment in respect of his ruptured hand, which was the result of the accident. A fair estimate can legitimately be made by the court and on that basis a reasonable amount can be awarded even in the absence of bills or vouchers or statement of account. The learned single Judge thought that a sum of Rs. 10,000/- would be reasonable although the claimant had put up a claim for a sum of Rs. 15,000/-. In our view, the amount awarded by the learned single Judge represents a fair estimate of the expenses which might have been incurred by the claimant on account of medical expenses including the cost of medicines, consultation with doctors, nutritious diet and conveyance and travelling, expenses.
5. In State of Kerala v. Vijayakumaran Nair, 1982 ACJ 451 (Kerala), a Bench of the Kerala High Court following the decision of this court in United India Fire and General Insurance Company Ltd. v. Sayar Kanwar, 1976 ACJ 426 (Rajasthan), observed that failure of the injured to produce bills or vouchers in support of his claim in respect of nourishment and medicines cannot be considered as fatal and some reasonable amount can be awarded on each count. In that case, the court also allowed the claimant transport expenses to and from the hospital, considering the nature of injury suffered and also considering the fact that the injured had to go several times to the hospital even after he was discharged, for physiotherapy. The same was the situation in the present case. Although the claimant had to remain as an indoor patient in the hospital for 46 days only but he had to visit the hospital for physiotherapy for a prolonged period of two years. It is difficult for a person in agony, particularly when his right hand is injured, to think of keeping accounts of the amount spent by him on undergoing the treatment or on conveyance or on nutritious diet purchased by him. Thus, merely because of the absence of bills regarding purchase of medicines or a statement of account, the claim of the injured under this head cannot be negatived. We are of the view that the amount awarded by the learned single Judge represents a fair and reasonable estimate of the expenses which the claimant must have incurred on this score.
6. We find no force in this appeal and the same is dismissed.
7. Appeal dismissed.