Partly allowed

Manoj Kumar v. Shamsher Singh and Ors.

Punjab & Haryana HC14 Oct 2011FAO/3122/2010

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In this本部门 matter, Justice Chauhan allowed a Consumer Written Appeal, condoning a 32-day delay in filing. The Court quashed the impugned award of the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal regarding pain and suffering, attendant charges, and loss of future marriage perspective, enhancing the compensation by Rs. 65,000/-, while maintaining other heads of award.

What did the court decide?

The appeal is partly allowed; the award of the Tribunal is modified with an enhancement of Rs. 65,000/- payable within 45 days with 6% per annum interest.

Manoj Kumar Vs Shamsher Singh and Ors. — Motor Accident Claims | Punjab & Haryana HC (2011)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA HIGH COURT AT CHANDIGARH

¶2

FAO No. 3122 of 2010 (O&M) Date of Decision: 14.10.2011

Manoj Kumar

....Appellant

Versus

Shamsher Singh & others

¶7

....Respondents

¶8

CORAM: HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE JITENDRA CHAUHAN

¶9

Present: Mr.Sandeep Kumar Yadav, Advocate, for the appellant,

¶10

Mr.Manoj K.Tanwar, Advocate, for respondent Nos. 1 & 2,

¶11

Ms.Vandana Malhotra, Advocate, for respondent No.3.

¶12

Mr. Sumit Sangwan, Advocate for the driver and owner.

¶13

Mr.Suvir Dewan, Advocate for respondent No.7.

¶14

¶15

JITENDRA CHAUHAN J. (ORAL)

¶16

C.M. No.15233-II of 2010

¶17

CM allowed.

¶18

Delay of 32 days in filing the appeal is hereby

¶19

condoned.

¶20

FAO No. 3122 of 2010 (O&M)

¶21

The instant appeal is directed against the impugned award dated 05.12.2009, passed by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Narnaul, (for short 'MACT'), seeking enhancement of compensation on account of injuries sustained by him in the accident.

¶22

The learned Tribunal awarded Rs.1,48,000/- under various heads (Rs. 32,000/- for disability, Rs. 15,000/- for pain and suffering, Rs.86,000/- for medical expenses and Rs. 15,000/- for healthy diet and transportation).

¶23

The perusal of the record shows that the appellant remained admitted as indoor patient in the hospital for about 33 days. The appellant was 19 years of age, at the time of accident and was a student of B.A. III Year, and as per the Medical Certificate issued to the appellant he had to suffer 16% permanent disability.

¶24

From the perusal of the record it has been shown that no amount has been given under the heads 'attendant and loss of future marriage perspectus'. This injury renders the appellant ineligible to join Armed Forces and the appellant has to remain under some restrictions throughout the life.

¶25

Keeping in view the above, this Court feels that no compensation has been awarded under the heads 'attendant and for future perspectus' and the compensation awarded under the head 'pain and suffering' is inadequate. Accordingly, the compensation awarded under the head 'loss of future marriage perspectus' is Rs.50,000/-, 'attendant charges' Rs.5,000/- and under the head 'pain and suffering' is granted Rs.10,000/-. Thus, the total amount enhanced comes to Rs.65,000/-. This amount is over and above the amount already granted.

¶26

Against all other heads, an adequate and reasonable compensation has been awarded. To that extent, the award passed by the learned Tribunal is maintained.

¶27

The appeal is partly allowed and award of Ld.Tribunal is modified to the extent indicated above. The enhanced amount of Rs.65,000/- shall be payable within 45 days from the receipt of copy of this judgment. In case enhanced amount is not paid within stipulated period, it shall carry interest at the rate of 6 % per annum from the date of filing of the appeal till it is paid.

¶28

(JITENDRA CHAUHAN) JUDGE

¶29

Note : Whether to be referred to Reporter ? Yes / No

¶30

14.10.2011 tarunsahni

Manoj Kumar v. Shamsher Singh and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Manoj Kumar v. Shamsher Singh and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

(O&M) Sunil Rao Vs State of Haryana through Collector and Others

Sahib Singh and Ors. Vs Jagatvir Singh @ Jaify and Ors.

Gurbax Kaur and Ors. Vs Saroop Singh and Ors.

Sati Devi Vs Veena Devi

Prithvi Vs Shamsher Singh and Ors.

Hari Ram Vs Shamsher Singh and Ors.