923/2010 Suit ABDUL REHMAN (Plaintiff) V/S CHAIRMAN M/S.MARI GAS (Defendant)
Sindh High Court
Bench: Hon'ble Mr. Justice Nazar Akbar
Order Date: 02-APR-14
(a) Limitation Act (IX of 1908)--- ----Art. 22 & S. 3---Suit for damages---Plaintiff sought damages and compensation for mental torture and harassment caused by the change in medical policy of its employer / defendant---Contention of defendant was that plaintiff retired in the year 2004, and enjoyed medical benefits till 2006, whereafter the medical policy was changed and having filed the suit in 2010, the same was barred by limitation under Art. 22 of the Schedule to the Limitation Act, 1908---Held, that new medical policy was made effective in November, 2006, but the same was declared illegal by the High Court in its constitutional jurisdiction, in the year 2010, and the present suit was filed three months after order of High Court in the said constitutional Petition---Cause of action was therefore continuing and limitation period for filing suit started running from date of order of High Court in constitutional petition---Suit was, therefore, within time and maintainable. (b) Tort--- ----Agony and mental torture---Suit for damages and compensation---Quantum of damages, determination of---Rule of thumb, application of---Obligation of court to determine damages once it was established that plaintiff suffered mental torture---Scope---Once the Trial Court had come to the conclusion that the plaintiff suffered mental torture and agony for which defendant was responsible, the Trial Court had to grant damages as compensation---Such damages were obviously general damages and discretion was to be exercised in justifying the quantum of compensation to plaintiff---Such quantum of damages was to be determined by following the "rule of thumb", and any accurate and definite answer to the question of quantum of damages was not possible---While sufferings of human beings can be appreciated, but the magnitude / impact of mental torture could not be; and therefore, it was humanly impossible to assess a fair compensation to the satisfaction of a person who had complained of injury---Trial Court, even in absence of any method to determine a fair assessment of damage, was still under an obligation to decide an amount of money as compensation keeping in view facts and circumstances placed on record by the injured/plaintiff, to show how tortuous the conduct of the aggressor was and for how long the plaintiff remained under mental stress---While applying the "rule of thumb":, the conscious of the court should be satisfied that the damages to be awarded, if not completely, then satisfactorily compensate the plaintiff.Full judgment text for this case is not yet available on Pakistan Law Reports. Check the official Sindh High Court case law portal for the complete order.
This judgment is reproduced from a publicly available source for informational purposes and does not constitute legal advice. If you believe this listing contains an error,
let us know.