Ashwani Kumar v. Ram Singh Gurjar And ORS

FAO-4589-2019 (O&M) - 1IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH 117 FAO-4589-2019 (O&M) Date of decision: 10.02.2026 Ashwani Kumar ...Appellant(s) Vs.

Ram Singh Gurjar and others

...Respondent(s)

CORAM:

HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE NIDHI GUPTA Present:- Mr. Randeep Singh Dhull, Advocate for the appellant. Mr. Pavinder Singh Bedi, Advocate for respondent No.3-Insurance Co.

*** NIDHI GUPTA, J.

The present appeal has been 1led by the injured-claimant seeking enhancement of compensa6on of Rs.85,505/- awarded by the learned Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Gurugram (for short "the learned Tribunal") vide Award dated 06.12.2018 passed in MACT Case No. 50 dated 13.07.2017 1led under Sec6on 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988. 2.

Brief facts of the case are that the ld. Tribunal on the basis of evidence adduced by the par6es concluded that the appellant had su?ered injuries in a motor vehicular accident that took place on 02.06.2015 at about 05:00 a.m. due to the rash and negligent driving of a Truck bearing registra6on No. RJ-04-GF-3837 (hereinaAer referred to as "the o?ending vehicle") being driven by respondent No.1; owned by respondent No.2; and insured by respondent No.3. The above said compensa6on was awarded

FAO-4589-2019 (O&M) - 2along with interest @ 7% per annum. All the respondents were jointly and severally held liable to pay the amount of compensa6on. 3.

Learned counsel for the appellant seeks enhancement of compensa6on by submiFng that learned Tribunal has erred in awarding meager compensa6on of Rs.85,505/- as it has failed to appreciate that in the accident in ques6on, both the legs of the appellant were amputated. Resultantly, appellant had su?ered 50% permanent disability. However, learned Tribunal has failed to award adequate amount keeping in view the disability and handicapped of the appellant. Learned Tribunal has also ignored that now the appellant has to keep an aIendant for the remaining part of his life. Prior to the accident, appellant was working as a Conductor in M/s. Central Transport Company, New Delhi and was drawing salary of Rs.6,000/- p.m. However due to amputa6on of his both legs, appellant is not able to do work.

Yet, nothing has been awarded by way of future income; whereas at least Rs.10 lacs ought to have been awarded. At the 6me of accident, appellant was only 26 years old. Even this aspect of the maIer has been ignored by the learned Tribunal. It is accordingly prayed that the present Appeal be allowed; and the compensa6on be enhanced in above terms.

4.

Mr. Pavinder Singh Bedi, Advocate appears and 1les his Vakalatnama on behalf of the respondent No.3-Insurance Company in Court today, which is taken on record. Learned counsel for respondent No.3 opposes submissions made on behalf of the appellant and submits that the impugned Award su?ers from no in1rmity as the compensa6on awarded to

FAO-4589-2019 (O&M) - 3the appellant is just and fair. Hence, the present appeal deserves to be dismissed.

5.

No other argument is raised on behalf of the par6es. I have heard ld. counsel and perused the case 1le in detail. I 1nd no merit in the submissions made on behalf of the appellant.

6.

The accident in ques6on had taken place on 02.06.2015. The appellant had placed on record medical bills Ex.P1 to Ex.P74 for an amount of Rs.68,505/- which was duly reimbursed by the learned Tribunal. Appellant had also brought on record as MLR Ex.P75 and a coloured photocopy of the Disability Cer61cate as Ex.P76. However, appellant had failed to produce the original Disability Cer61cate; and had also failed to examine any Doctor or Medical OMcer of the Medical Board which had assessed disability of the appellant. As regards the disability of the appellant, the same cannot be given any weightage to for the reason that the appellant had produced only photocopy of the Disability Cer61cate. Furthermore, as per the record, the appellant was hospitalized from 02.06.2015 6ll 16.07.2015, on which date, he was discharged.

As per the record, 6ll date of discharge, there is no men6on of any amputa6on. Even as per the MLR Ex.P75, there is no men6on of any amputa6on. ThereaAer, appellant was readmiIed on 15.02.2016. Appellant has failed to bring on record any document to show that the amputa6on subsequently su?ered by the appellant had any connec6on with the accident dated 02.06.2015.

FAO-4589-2019 (O&M) - 4Sr. No. Heads of Claim Amount 1.

Hospitaliza6on, pain & su?ering, fracture, surgery Rs.10,000/- 2.

Special diet, pain and transporta6on charges Rs.5,000/- 3.

Medicines Charges Rs.68,505/- Total Rs.83,505/- 7.

Accordingly, keeping in view the above facts which have not been disputed by learned counsel for the appellant, I 1nd no error in the compensa6on awarded by the learned Tribunal. The present Appeal stands dismissed.

8.

Pending applica6on(s), if any, also stand(s) disposed of. 10.02.2026 (NIDHI GUPTA) Divyanshi JUDGE Whether speaking/reasoned:

Yes/No Whether reportable:

Yes/No