Not A Mere Breach Of Contract: Telangana High Court Refuses To Quash FIR In ₹73 Crore Garment Investment Fraud Accused Not Entitled To Copies Of 'Unrelied' Upon Documents At The Stage Of Framing Of Charges Under Section 91 CrPC: Supreme Court Elected Representatives Have No Privilege To Resort To Violence; Criminal Antecedents Are Material For Bail Adjudication: Supreme Court Mere Absence Of Transport Documents Does Not Create A Presumption Of Violation Of Chhattisgarh Agricultural Cattle Preservation Act, 2004: Supreme Court Section 396 IPC | Conviction For 'Dacoity With Murder' Requires Proof That Murder Was Committed In The Course Of Dacoity: Allahabad High Court 'Developers Cannot Delay Conveyance For Eternity And Milk Additional FSI Benefits': Bombay High Court Upholds Societies' Deemed Conveyance Pre-Approval Statutory Dues Stand Extinguished Upon Approval Of Resolution Plan; GST Authorities Cannot Initiate Fresh Proceedings: Calcutta High Court Unregistered Agreement To Sell With Delivery Of Possession Is Admissible In A Suit For Specific Performance: Delhi High Court Stigmatic Order Discharging Probationer Without Inquiry Is Void For Violation Of Natural Justice: Gujarat High Court Execution Proceedings | Court Cannot Impose Arbitrary Financial Conditions Without Reason In Stay Applications: Himachal Pradesh High Court Section 528 BNSS | High Court Cannot Exercise Inherent Powers To Circumvent Statutory Bar Against Second Revision: Delhi High Court Advocate Empanelment | Restriction On Multiple Applications Is A Procedural Choice Within Employer’s Domain: Delhi High Court Acquittal Appeal | Double Presumption Of Innocence In Favour Of Accused Cannot Be Disturbed Merely Because Another View Is Possible: Gujarat High Court SC/ST Act | Offence Under Section 3(1)(g) Not Attracted If Dispossession Or Interference Is Not Due To Victim's Caste: Himachal Pradesh High Court Judicial Officer Must Maintain Distance From Practicing Advocates To Avoid Impropriety: Gujarat High Court Upholds Dismissal Section 183 BNSS | Investigating Officer Cannot Independently Record Further Statement Of Victim After Recording Before Magistrate: Karnataka High Court Non-Production Of Case Property And Missing Link Evidence In Seizure Cases Vitiates Prosecution: Himachal Pradesh High Court Employees Compensation Act | Death Due To Cardiac Arrest During Employment Is An 'Accident' Arising Out Of Stress And Strain Of Duty: J&K High Court Transfer Of Proceedings | Courts Must Issue Fresh Notice To Parties Even If They Had Appeared Before The Transferor Court: Kerala High Court Sets Aside Ex-Parte Award Section 80P(4) IT Act Does Not Deny Deduction To Regional Rural Banks As They Retain The 'Deemed Co-operative Society' Status Under Section 22 RRB Act: Madras High Court Property Purchased In Name Of Child For Family Benefit Is Not A 'Benami Transaction' Under Section 2(9) Of The 1988 Act: Madhya Pradesh High Court Person Without Caveatable Interest Cannot Challenge Will Or Seek Revocation Of Probate: Madras High Court Divorce | Cruelty Must Be Assessed By Cumulative Effect Of Matrimonial Conduct Rather Than Isolated Incidents: Orissa High Court Merely Labeling Insurance Policy As Comprehensive Does Not Create Unlimited Liability: MP High Court Order VII Rule 11 CPC | Plaint Must Be Rejected If Limitation Bar Is Apparent From Face Of Pleadings: Patna High Court Limitation Act | 'Sufficient Cause' Cannot Be Used To Revive Stale Or Dead Claims By State: Orissa High Court Quashes Order Condoning 53-Year Delay Employee Cannot Remain Dormant Like Rip Van Winkle & Awaken At Convenience: Punjab & Haryana High Court Dismisses Stale Service Plea With ₹25K Cost Section 29 NDPS Act | Mere Allegation Of 'Cooperation' Without Specific Overt Acts Cannot Sustain Charge Of Conspiracy: Rajasthan High Court Forest Land Status Does Not Extinguish Private Civil Title: Punjab & Haryana High Court Upholds Decree For Possession Once Admitted In Evidence, Document Cannot Be De-Marked On Grounds Of Insufficiency Of Stamp Duty: Telangana High Court Section 190 BNSS | Mere Presence In Unlawful Assembly With Active Intent Renders Member Vicariously Liable For Homicidal Act: Punjab & Haryana High Court Contributory Negligence Under Motor Vehicles Act Cannot Be Inferred Without Cogent Evidence: Telangana High Court Enhances Compensation Motor Vehicles Act | Section 164 Compensation Of Rs. 5 Lakhs Applicable Even To Pending Claims Arising Prior To 2019 Amendment: Punjab & Haryana High Court Consumer Protection Act | Builder Liable To Pay Interest For Delayed Possession Despite Force Majeure Plea If Agreement Executed Post-Outbreak: State Commission

P&H HC Criticizes lower compensation awarded by Tribunal to injured claimant in motor accident case

07 May 2024 8:19 AM

By: Admin


On April 17, 2023, the Punjab and Haryana High Court delivered its judgment in FAO No.1187 of 2019 (O&M) in a case filed by Jaswant Singh against Rachit Gulati and others. The appellant had challenged the quantum of compensation awarded by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Rupnagar, vide award dated October 29, 2018, after he was injured in a road accident in 2016.

The appellant had claimed that he was driving his motorcycle on the correct side of the road when a car driven by respondent No.1, in a rash and negligent manner, struck him while he had parked on the side of the road to drink water. The respondent denied the accident and the respondent No.3-Insurance Company filed a written statement denying the accident's factum.

The Tribunal had awarded compensation of Rs.11,86,208 to the appellant under various heads. Aggrieved by the compensation awarded, the appellant filed an appeal, challenging the Tribunal's compensation amount.

During the pendency of the appeal, the claimant-appellant filed an application for permission to lead additional evidence. The additional evidence was a disability certificate issued by the Medical Board, Government Medical College and Hospital, Sector 32, Chandigarh, showing the appellant's disability to be 51%.

The High Court heard the arguments of the appellant's counsel and the respondent No.3-Insurance Company's counsel and perused the evidence on record.

The High Court observed that the appellant had undergone eight surgeries and remained admitted in various hospitals for about a year. The Court also noted that the appellant's functional disability was assessed as 25%, and the appellant's vocation as a coaching centre operator was affected by the injury. Hence, an addition of 40% towards loss of future prospects, as per the judgment of Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Pappu Deo Yadav vs. Naresh Kumar & Ors., was warranted.

The High Court enhanced the compensation amount and awarded Rs.35,48,608 to the appellant under various heads, including medical bills, future treatment, pain and suffering, loss of amenities of life, and attendant charges. The enhanced amount included future prospects of Rs.1,40,000, a multiplier of 17, and an amount of Rs.2,00,000 towards loss of amenities of life.

The High Court allowed the appeal, modifying the compensation awarded by the Tribunal, and directed the enhanced amount to attract interest @ 7.5% per annum from the date of filing of the claim petition till realization of the amount.

Jaswant Singh VS  Rachit Gulati and others.

[gview file="https://lawyer-e-news.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/04/2.pdf"]

Latest Legal News