High Court of Punjab and HaryanaFAO/3065/2003disposed of

Banwari Lal v. Hans Raj And ORS

2026-05-08Mr. Justice Yashvir Singh Rathor9 pages

!"#$%$ &'()) * ++ )))),,-- &

./%0% 1 ))) %, &"& %

2+ ) 1 1. 1

!"#$ &&''

(

!"#$ &#! )#*+$ ,#(&- 1. 1

)) / -

This appeal has been instituted against the Award dated 23.05.2003 passed by MACT, Gurgaon (for short "Tribunal") for enhancement of compensation awarded in MACT Case No.116 of 11.12.2001 in a petition under Section 166 of Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 vide which a sum of Rs.1,31,800/- has been awarded as compensation to the claimant/appellant along with interest 9% per annum due to injuries suffered by him in a motor vehicular accident which took place on 20.10.2001, on account of rash and negligent driving by respondent No.1, while driving offending vehicle bearing No.DL-1CG-2262 (for short 'offending vehicle'), owned by respondent No.2, which was insured with respondent No.3.

From the pleadings of parties, following issues were framed by the learned Tribunal:- "1) Whether the accident took place due to rash and negligent driving of respondent No.1 as alleged? OPP.

2) If issue No.1 is proved, whether the claimant is entitled for compensation, if so how much and from whom? OPP. 3) Whether respondent No.1 was not holding a valid driving licence at the time of accident, as alleged? OPR. 4) Whether there is violation of terms and conditions of insurance policy, as alleged? OPR.

Whether the petitioner has no cause of action to file the petition, as alleged? OPR 6.

Whether the petition is not maintainable in the present form, as alleged? OPR 7) Relief."

Thereafter, the parties led evidence in support of their case. 4.

After hearing the parties and going through the material on the file, learned Tribunal awarded a sum of Rs.1,31,800/- as compensation to the claimant, on account of injuries suffered by him along with interest @ 9% per annum from the date of filing of claim petition till realization, payable by respondents No.1 to 3 jointly and severally.

Feeling aggrieved, the appeal in hand has been preferred. The material on file has been perused and parties have been heard. 6.

The only issue required to be determined in the present appeal relates to the assessment of compensation. .%# %$ !

( $$! # /+!

# 0 &#!+$!

.0+'

'!- '!

+! *+ )# $$! #$$+!

!+ # '

& &#! )#

' !"

#%%!

vehicle bearing No.DL-1CG-2262

# !

0- &#! )# +!

&#! )# No appeal or cross-objections have been filed by

the respondents, challenging the said finding and accordingly, finding on issue No.1 is not required to be interfered with and the same is affirmed. 7.

It is pertinent to mention that the record of the present appeal and the Tribunal has got burnt in a fire incident in the High Court Registry and the present appeal has to be decided on the basis of the facts and evidence discussed by the Tribunal in the impugned award.

1 2!

$#+'

&&'' +!

$'( +%%!

(+'&' 3+ %$ $'+!

(#+ 4 (!

!(!

#&' 4 +%%!

%$+ '% (!0' %$+ (5'' '# 6

+%%!

7 &( !0'- 0+ $#(&# !!

( Learned counsel further argued that adequate compensation has not been awarded under pecuniary and non-pecuniary heads and same is liable to be enhanced. In support of his contentions, learned counsel for the appellant has relied upon 2014 (1) RCR (Civil) 914 Sanjay Verma Vs. Haryana Roadways and 2017 (16) SCC 680 National Insurance Co. Ltd Vs. Pranay Sethi and Others.

On the other hand, learned counsel for respondents argued that the award in question is adequate, well reasoned and justified. The material on file has been appreciated in the correct perspective while assessing the compensation and no interference in the same is thus called for. The law is well settled that the compensation to be awarded for injuries suffered by victim in a motor vehicular accident should be just and equitable. Courts have consistently held that while money cannot erase the pain, suffering, or trauma but it is the only legal means to provide restitution and restore

the victim to his previous position as far as possible for which 'just compensation' has to be assessed. It is also well settled that while it is impossible to fully compensate for the loss of limb, life, or quality of life, the compensation must be 'Just', meaning thereby, that it should be fair, reasonable, and equitable based on the evidence and not merely a 'Windfall' or a 'Pittance'. The core objective is to put the injured/victim in the same position he would have been if the accident had not taken place, to the extent money can do so. This approach ensures that the law provides a realistic recompense for the trauma endured, rather than just providing normal relief.

11.

Besides this, Hon'ble Supreme Court in 2013 (3) RCR (Civil) 934 - G.Ravindranath @ R. Chowdary Vs. E. Srinivas and another, has held that in a case of accident resulting in injuries to the victim, the compensation in personal injury cases should be determined under the following heads:- Pecuniary damages (Special damages) (i) Expenses relating to treatment, hospitalization, medicines, transportation, nourishing expenditure, food and miscellaneous (ii) Loss of earnings (and other gains) which the injured would have made had he not been injured, comprising:

(a) Loss of earning during the period of treatment; (b) Loss of future earnings on account of permanent disability (iii) Future medical expenses.

Non-pecuniary damages (General damages) (iv) Damages for pain, suffering and trauma as a consequence of the injuries.

(v) Loss of amenities (and/or loss of prospects of marriage). (vi) Loss of expectation of life (shortening of normal longevity). In routine personal injury cases, compensation will be awarded under heads (i), (ii) (a) and (iv) It is only in serious cases of injury, where there is specific medical evidence corroborating the evidence of the claimant that compensation will be granted under any of the heads (ii) (b), (iii), (v) and (vi) relating to loss of future earnings on account of permanent disability, future medical expenses, loss of amenities (and/or loss of prospects of marriage) and loss of expectation of life.

&&'' +%%!

3+ 3

#&!

+&# .0+'

#+ ('

%' !!

$#(&# 9 1: +! %#''#

# $

$ " #'()# & *+#,*+ # &

$ " )- &

$ . /

0 # '## / $%

# '1 ,'(

(!$#' ''- 5(!

;'- 4#&'

<+ # "!

=5 %#''#

%#+!

45 6 $ / & $

4 7 7 5

/ 8

8.# $ .

& :.# $ #

.# $ ; <

8 <

$81 8 ,'(

' &&

> !&#!

% $$!

? # ;'- 4#&'

<+ # %#(

< 9( 4#&'

)

'# (!

!(!

# !- .%

? # (- 4#&'

)

!(!

%#( # 4

#&!

+&# %$+ 3

& 9 '? ( ''

! )#

$# &?

&#&'- $# # $

0$#( &('- !0'! > +'

? ''

*$ ;'- 4#&'

<+ # &#!+$!

+((#!

$#!

!&#!

$'( 2'

!(!

#&'

!$ !

( !- % ( . #&'

$ !

9 6: %#( ( "! 0''

=5 4 '# !!

0'' $& =5 8 # =5 1 $$#+ &-( # ! " # > <#"!

;'-

!$# &#"!

0'' =5 # =5 "!

$ (!$

&+$!

>6B) <+&

# ($

< 9( 4#&'

)

@' !

!(!

#&'

!$ !

&#!

+! ( #&'

$ !

9 : %#( ( "! 0''

6 . $$! /+# ? &'$ &# '# (!

!(!

(- 4#&'

)

@' %#( # 1 0#+ # (#

#&!

+&# %$+ 3

#0"!

0- .0+'

& )# 1 ! . #!

@#$# @,

!$'

@, 9#?

!0'- $%$ =5

$ ! +! =

0;#; .# =

" 0 /=>= &$ 0 ? =% 0 $

@ $%

$ $

$ ? =% 0 $ $%

= . $

$% 07 $ A BC " &" +

" 1 1 #( !0'- $%$ =5 + 0'!

(#+ #&

$'(

(#"(

'# $!

5(# !#$# !

!0'- # 0 7 4# " $# 0 !&+!

!0'- #&

(#+

#+'!

# - ( !(

$&0'- $'( .0+'

% ?

# $#!# %$ $'( +%%!

%$+ 3

#&!

+&# +%%!

7 &( !0'- !!

(

+( 9 : $$#+ &( !0'-

$ (- #&# '# ! ( $!

%)345 2? $'( +%%!

%$+

#&!

+&# 0 !!

+( 9 : & +%%

&$'

! $#"-$ $ '# 3#-( %++ '%

$ ## '# ! $'( '!

# +(

%)645 $$#+ , $& &"%0!!/$&740! +(

%)345 %,#$ -"$

%)34 # !

/ &%, /

$ &8,&%% .0+'

? (#'- $#( $'( # 0 9 : & (# !!

( +( 9 : $$#+ '# $#( (!

!(!

#&'

# (# 4# " ,#+ $# '# %$ $'(

#+'!

# " 0 0' # !# -

' (# $$#+ 3+ +%%!

0- ( $$#! '- '!

# +(

%)45 $$#+ - %% !$&# 9 "0/$&7 /

9& 0 0'' &#"!

%' .0+'

%)66435 # ! 8,&%%$&#0//" & /

# %$ ( $''!

%# ,'( +%%!

%$+ 7 &( !0'- '# 6 0+ # (#+ 0 !!

# ! '# ( $$#! '- '!

# +(

%)45 - %% ! 9&$ $%

Resultantly, the compensation to be paid to claimant is assessed as under:-

,#(&#

(#+

,#(&# $$#+ 3+ 7 &( !0'-

96 :

+%%

98 :

&$'

96 :

8 .&## $

96 :

2# $#( !+

(

9 :

2# (

9 :

6 =5& ( 988 6: 1 .#'

9 :

As a result of aforesaid discussion, the present appeal is partly accepted with costs and the claimant is held entitled to enhanced compensation of Rs.69,233/- (Rs.2,01,033/- - Rs.1,31,800/-) (rounded to Rs.69,000/-) over and above the compensation awarded by Tribunal, payable by respondents No.1 to 3, jointly and severally, along with interest @ 9% per annum, from the date of filing of claim petition i.e., 11.12.2001, till realization. Since, appellant-Banwari Lal has already died, the compensation will be given to his legal heirs. 8 Registry is directed to email the authenticated copy of the award to the respondent Insurance Company in terms of directions issued by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Writ Petition (Civil) No.534 of 2020 titled "Bajaj Allianz General Insurance Company Versus Union of India and others", decided on 16.03.2021 and Insurance Company shall comply with the directions as issued under Clause (F) of the said judgment.

25.

Pending miscellaneous application(s), if any, shall also stand disposed of.

1. 1

())

&", > &? :#! C:)# > 9&#0' C:)#