Manjinder Singh v. Bhag Singh And ORS

-1IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH MANJINDER SINGH ......Appellant vs.

BHAG SINGH AND ORS.

......Respondents

Reserved on:- 23.03.2026

Pronounced on:- 08.05.2026 Uploaded on: 11.05.2026 Whether only the operative part of the judgment is pronounced? NO Whether full judgment is pronounced?

YES CORAM: HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE SUDEEPTI SHARMA

Present:

Ms. Jasdeep Kaur, Advocate for Mr. V.S. Saini, Advocate for the appellant.

Mr. Ashish Gupta, Advocate for Mr. Kapil Aggarwal, Advocate For respondents No.1 and 2.

Mr. Ashwani Talwar, Sr. Advocate with Ms. Pratiksha Sharma, Advocate for respondent No.3.

**** SUDEEPTI SHARMA J.

1.

The present appeal has been preferred against the award dated 05.12.2011 passed by the learned Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Chandigarh (for short, 'the Tribunal') in the claim petition filed under Section 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988, for enhancement of compensation granted to the claimants to the tune of Rs.51,91,533/- along with interest @ 8% per annum, on account of injuries sustained by the appellant/claimant - Manjinder Singh in a motor vehicular accident, occurred on 15.02.2009.

-22.

As sole issue for determination in the present appeal is confined to quantum of compensation awarded by the learned Tribunal, a detailed narration of the facts of the case is not required to be reproduced here for the sake of brevity.

SUBMISSIONS OF LEARNED COUNSEL FOR THE PARTIES 3.

Learned counsel for appellants contends that the compensation granted to the claimants is on the lower side and deserves to be enhanced. He, therefore, prays that the present appeal be allowed. 4.

Per contra, learned counsel for the respondent-Insurance Company contends as under:- (i) that the learned Tribunal has erred in holding that accident occurred due to sole negligence of the driver of offending vehicle.

(ii) that infact the accident was a result of contributory negligence of both the drivers.

(iii) that compensation awarded by learned Tribunal is on the higher side. He further contends that respondent-Insurance Company has filed separate appeal bearing FAO-1726-2012, titled as Oriental Insurance Company Ltd. Vs. Manjinder Singh and others" challenging quantum of compensation, therefore, he prays that present appeal be dismissed and amount of compensation be reduced as per latest law.

5.

I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the whole record of this case with their able assistance. 6.

At the very outset, it is pertinent to note that FAO-1726-2012, titled as Oriental Insurance Company Ltd. Vs. Manjinder Singh and

-3others" filed by the respondent No.3-Insurance company has already been dismissed by this Court vide order of even date detailing therein regarding every aspect of the arguments raised in the present appeal. 7.

In view thereof, the adjudication of the present appeal no longer survives.

8.

In view of the above, the present appeal is allowed. 9.

Pending application (s), if any, also stand disposed of. 08.05.2026 (SUDEEPTI SHARMA) Ayub/Sahil JUDGE Whether speaking/non-speaking :

Yes/No Whether reportable :

Yes