Industrial Units In MIDC Areas Exempt From Municipal Property Tax Only As Long As MIDC Provides Amenities: Supreme Court MIDC Service Charges Are Fees For Services, Not Taxes; Industrial Units Must Pay Municipal Property Tax: Supreme Court Public Servants Have No Vested Right To Be Considered For Promotion Under Repealed Rules: Supreme Court IBC | Successful Resolution Applicant Cannot Renege From Approved Plan By Citing Pending Litigations Or Letter Of Intent Conditions: Supreme Court Payment Of 93% Sale Consideration Demonstrates Readiness & Willingness For Specific Performance: Supreme Court Delay In Issuing Legal Notice No Ground To Deny Specific Performance If Suit Filed Within Limitation: Supreme Court Brandishing Pistol At Children During Abduction Inherently Constitutes Threat To Cause Death Or Hurt: Supreme Court Upholds Conviction Under Section 364A IPC Lack Of CDR Records For 2003-Era Kidnapping Not Fatal To Prosecution If Oral Evidence Of Ransom Is Cogent: Supreme Court Supreme Court Dissolves Marriage On Ground Of Irretrievable Breakdown Under Article 142 Despite Wife's Opposition To Decree Failure To Conduct TIP For Unknown Accused Diminishes Evidentiary Value Of Dock Identification: Supreme Court Acquits Rape-Murder Convicts On Death Row Padded Evidence Created By Investigating Agency To Bolster Prosecution Case Fatal To Conviction In Circumstantial Evidence Cases: Supreme Court CCI Has No Inherent Power To Keep Combination Approval In Abeyance Or Order Re-Notification Without Express Statutory Authority: Supreme Court CCI Cannot Reopen Concluded Merger Approvals After One Year; Characterization Dispute In Filing Is Not 'Non-Disclosure': Supreme Court Sets Aside Orders Against Amazon Stamping Defects Are Curable, Arbitrators Empowered To Decide Such Objections Under Section 16 A&C Act: Supreme Court Rejection Of Section 16 Objection By Arbitrator Cannot Be Challenged Under Article 226/227; Aggrieved Party Must Wait For Final Award: Supreme Court Police Parading Accused Or Orchestrating Social Media Condemnation Is Extra-Legal Punishment, Violates Article 21: Rajasthan High Court Inclusion Of Hash Value In Electronic Record Certificates Is Essential For Data Integrity; Not Arbitrary: Supreme Court Judiciary Not Above Criticism; Portraying Imaginary Corrupt Court In Films Doesn't Scandalize Real Courts: Madras High 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