Sumanandanr v. Nhai And ORS

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT

CHANDIGARH 107+232 CM-1782-1785-LPA-2026 and Decided on :01.04.2026 SUMAN AND ANOTHER ...Appellants

Versus

NATIONAL HIGHWAYS AUTHORITY OF INDIA AND OTHERS . . . Respondents CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE HARSIMRAN SINGH SETHI HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE DEEPAK MANCHANDA PRESENT: Ms. Ekta Thakur, Advocate & Ms. Kulwinder Kaur, Advocate for the appellants.

Mr. Sunil Kumar, Advocate for Mr. Samarth Sagar, Advocate for respondent No. 1-NHAI.

Mr. Rahul Rampal, Additional Advocate General, Punjab. None for respondents No. 3 &4.

**** HARSIMRAN SINGH SETHI , J. (Oral) CM-1783-1782-LPA-2026 The prayer in the present applications are for placing on record the additional affidavit on behalf of the respondents alongwith annexures and further prayer for exemption from filing the certified copies of Annexures A2 and Annexure -3. Keeping in view the averments mentioned in the applications, the same are allowed. Copy of affidavit on behalf of the respondents alongwith annexures is taken on record subject to all just exceptions.

CM-1782-1783-LPA-2026 and CM-1785-1784-LPA-2026 The prayer in the present applications are for placing on record the reply to the application (CM-7162-LPA-2024) seeking condonation of delay of 272 days in filing the main appeal and further prayer for exemption from filing the certified copy of the said reply. Keeping in view the averments mentioned in the applications, the same are allowed. Copy of reply to the application (CM-7162-LPA-2024) seeking condonation of delay of 272 days in filing the main appeal, is taken on record subject to all just exceptions.

CM-7162-LPA-2024 The prayer in the present application is for condonation of delay of 272 days in filing the present appeal ( LPA-2920-2024 ). Keeping in view the averments enumerated in the application, which are duly supported by an affidavit, the same is allowed. Consequently, the delay of 272 days in filing the present appeal ( LPA-2920-2024 ) is condoned.

LPA-2920-2024 1.

In the present appeal, the challenge is to the impugned order dated 12.01.2024 passed by the learned Single Judge in CWP No. 16857 of 2018, whereby the writ petition filed by the appellants has been allowed, granting compensation of Rs. 5,00,000/- on account of the death of Ankit,

CM-1782-1783-LPA-2026 and son of the appellants herein, however, it is contended that the awarded compensation is on the lower side.

2.

Learned counsel for the appellants submits that the liberty granted to approach the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal (hereinafter referred to as "the MACT") is futile, but the said fact could not be raised before the learned Single Judge. Hence, the present appeal may kindly be disposed of having been not pressed any further with liberty to file a review application before the learned Single Judge.

3.

Ordered accordingly.

4.

Pending civil miscellaneous application, if any, stands disposed of.

(HARSIMRAN SINGH SETHI) JUDGE ( DEEPAK MANCHANDA ) JUDGE 01.04.2026 Riya Whether speaking/reasoned:

Yes/No Whether Reportable:

Yes/No