High Court awards Dr. & Ms. Harricharan $1M judgement with costs
THE lawsuit by plaintiffs Dr. C.E. Harricharan & wife against defendants Ron Singh & Chunilall Williams for damages for a wrecked vehicle and injuries suffered in a Railway Embankment crash which occurred in 2003 ended in the High Court on Friday with the plaintiffs being awarded judgement in the sum of $1M, together with costs.
In handing down judgment, Chief Justice Ian Chang, S.C., noted that the case was yet another one which took more than seven years for hearing to commence, and he deemed this a discredit to the judicial system.
Consequent to an accident which occurred on  21st October, 2003 on the Railway Embankment, East Coast Demerara, the  plaintiffs, Dr. C.E.  Harricharan and his wife Chandrawattie Harricharan, jointly and severally, brought an action, on 20th November 2003, against first named defendant Ron Singh, and Chunilall Williams, seeking the following reliefs:
(a) Damages in excess of $50,000 for personal injuries, loss and expense suffered by the plaintiffs and caused by the First named defendant’s negligent driving on the 21st October 2003 at Liliendaal Public Road, East Coast, Demerara, when he was the owner/driver of motor vehicle, GHH 4711, which collided with motor car, PEE 8410, being owner driven by the First named plaintiff whilst the Second named plaintiff was travelling in the said vehicle, PEE 8410.
(b) Damages in excess of $1,800,000 for replacement and loss of use of the plaintiff’s motor car, the irreparable damage of which was caused by the  First named defendant’s negligent driving of motor vehicle GHH 4711 which collided with PEE 8410 on the 21st October, 2003 at Liliendaal Public Road, East Coast, Demerara. The second named plaintiff has been awarded special damages totalling $150, 000.      
After delving into the law and the facts of the case, the Acting Chief Justice found that the speed at which the number one named defendant was driving, in the circumstances of the condition of the road at the material time, contributed to the seriousness of the damage and injury suffered by the plaintiffs. 
The court assessed the contribution of the First named defendant to such damage and injury to be 20%.
The Chief Justice, however, ruled that the special damages claimed by the First and Second named plaintiffs must be limited to what was stated in  their particulars of special damages in their  unamended statement of claim, even though in the evidence such special damages were stated as much greater. 
The court awarded to the first named plaintiff, as general and special damages against the First named defendant, the sum of $660,000; and the 2nd named defendant was deemed liable in the sum of $190, 000.  The second named plaintiff was awarded special damages in the sum of $150,000.
Interest will accrue on the said sums at the rate of 6% per annum, commencing from the 20th November 2003 to the date of the rendering of this decision; and thereafter at the rate of 4% per annum until the liability has been fully paid.
Costs were awarded to the plaintiffs, jointly and severally, in the sum of $25, 000 against the First named defendant.