IBC Moratorium | Criminal Court Cannot Direct Disbursal Of Corporate Debtor's Assets To Complainant Pending CIRP: Supreme Court Section 138 NI Act | Failure To Implead Company As Accused Renders Complaint Fatally Defective; Section 319 CrPC Cannot Be Used To Cure Such Fundamental Defect: Supreme Court 'Last Seen Theory' Alone Cannot Sustain Conviction: Supreme Court Acquits Man In Murder Case 'Every Lawyer Has A Duty To Act Decently': Supreme Court Modifies Suspension Of Advocate For Misconduct In Court Premises Mere Declaration Of 'Transitional Area' Under Article 243-Q(1)(a) Of Constitution Does Not Automatically Convert Rural Area Into Urban Area: Supreme Court Supreme Court Quashes Externment Order, Terms Non-Compliance With Natural Justice A "Travesty Of Constitutional Guarantees" 'Certiorari Is Not Appellate': Supreme Court Rejects Plea In Decades-Old Co-operative Society Membership Dispute Victim Must Authorize Settlement: Supreme Court Rules Informants Cannot Quash Criminal Cases Without Real Victim's Consent State Cannot Pick And Choose: Supreme Court Restores Right To Retrospective Regularisation For Daily Wage Employees Order VI Rule 17 CPC | Amendment of Plaint After Commencement Of Trial Cannot Be Allowed Without Proving Due Diligence: Supreme Court Discrepancy Between Ocular Testimony And Medical Evidence Creates Reasonable Doubt: Supreme Court Order VI Rule 17 & Order VIII Rule 6A CPC | Counter Claim Cannot Be Permitted After Trial Concludes When Party Fails To Pay Court Fees Initially: Supreme Court Nominee Holds Insurance Proceeds In Trust For Legal Heirs; Supreme Court Directs Equitable Distribution Pending Succession Proceedings PC Act | Court Must Impose Statutory Minimum Imprisonment Upon Conviction Under Sections 7 And 13(2): Supreme Court Supreme Court Quashes Corruption Case Against Official Caught In Factional Crossfire Retaliatory Counterblasts Cannot Be Used As Weapons Of Harassment: Supreme Court Quashes Criminal Complaint Over Civil Land Dispute Order VII Rule 11 CPC | Court Must Defer Question Of Ad-Valorem Court Fee To Evidence When Possession Status Is Disputed: Supreme Court Minor Shortfall In Earnest Money Deposit Does Not Vitiate Auction Sale If It Causes No Prejudice: Supreme Court 'Flimsy And Untenable': Supreme Court Cancels Bail Of Accused In Gruesome 'Petrol-Burning' Murder Case Parity Is Not A Mechanical Mathematical Formula: Supreme Court Rejects Bail Plea Of Murder Accused Article 142 Constitution of India | Supreme Court May Protect Retiral Benefits Of Employees Whose Caste Certificates Are Invalidated In Exceptional Cases Omission Of CGST Rule 96(10) Applies To All Pending Proceedings: Supreme Court Mere Marking Does Not Prove Contents: Supreme Court Clarifies Evidence Law In Testamentary Proceedings Arbitral Tribunal Under Section 16 Of A&C Act Has Exclusive Jurisdiction To Determine Arbitrability Of Claims Including Excepted Matters: Supreme Court Arbitration Agreement Can Be Incorporated Into A Personal Guarantee Through A Composite Transaction: Supreme Court

P&H High Court Enhances Compensation in Motor Accident Case, Citing Inadequate Award

07 May 2024 8:19 AM

By: Admin


In a significant ruling, the High Court of Punjab and Haryana at Chandigarh has enhanced the compensation awarded to a motor accident victim, deeming the earlier award as inadequate. The judgment, pronounced by Hon'ble Ms. Justice Amarjot Bhatti, addressed the appeal filed by Raghbir Singh against the award passed by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Kurukshetra.

Inadequate Compensation for Severe Injuries

The accident, which occurred in 2006, resulted in Raghbir Singh sustaining multiple injuries, including fractures and muscle tears. After undergoing extensive medical treatment in various hospitals, the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal granted compensation of Rs. 4,21,500/- along with interest. However, the appellant contended that the awarded amount was insufficient to cover the medical expenses and the extent of disability suffered.

Enhanced Compensation for Medical Expenses and Disability

The High Court carefully examined the medical bills and treatment records from Apna Hospital, Kurukshetra, and S.P.S. Apollo Hospital, Ludhiana, and upheld the awarded compensation for medical expenses, stating, "The compensation of Rs. 3,21,500/- granted for medical expenditure does not require any interference."

However, regarding the permanent disability suffered by Raghbir Singh, the Court observed, "The appellant suffered 41% disability in knee, ankle, and muscle wasting in the left leg. The Tribunal awarded Rs. 50,000/- for permanent disability. The appellant is entitled to an additional Rs. 94,000/-."

Loss of Income and Other Expenses Recognized

Highlighting the impact of the accident on the appellant's profession as a shopkeeper, the High Court granted compensation for loss of income, attendant charges, transportation, and special diet, which the Tribunal had not considered. The Court stated, "Considering the seat of injury as well as his profession, the functional disability is taken as 15%. Therefore, the appellant is entitled to Rs. 20,000/- for loss of income, Rs. 5,000/- for attendant charges, Rs. 10,000/- for transportation, and Rs. 10,000/- for special diet."

Future Medical Treatment Claim Not Established

While the appellant claimed compensation for potential future medical treatments, the Court observed a lack of supporting evidence and did not award compensation for this aspect.

Total Compensation Increased to Rs. 5,60,500/-

Taking all aspects into consideration, the High Court modified the award passed by the Tribunal and increased the total compensation to Rs. 5,60,500/-, including interest at 6% per annum from the date of filing the appeal till realization.

Date of Decision: 24th July 2023

Raghbir Singh vs Dharmender Etc.

[gview file="https://lawyer-e-news.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/07/Raghbir_Singh_vs_Dharmender_Etc_on_24_July_2023_PH.pdf"]

Latest Legal News