Allowed

Narang Singh v. Jagbir Singh and Ors.

Punjab & Haryana HC26 Nov 2014FAO/2090/2002

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The appellant appealed against the compensation awarded by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal for injuries sustained in a road accident. The Court found the Tribunal's award insufficient regarding permanent disablement and loss of earnings, enhancing the amount and allocating specific heads of payment.

What did the court decide?

The impugned award was modified to grant enhanced compensation on heads of permanent disablement, loss of income, medical expenses, attendant services, and pain and suffering, with interest at 7.5% p.

Narang Singh Vs Jagbir Singh and Ors. — Motor Accident Claims | Punjab & Haryana HC (2014)

¶1

�� 

¶2

��

¶3

Date of decision: 26^th November, 2014

Narang Singh

� Appellant

Versus

Jagbir Singh and others

¶8

� Respondents

¶9

��

¶10

Whether Reporters of Local Newspapers may be allowed to see the judgment?

¶11

Whether to be referred to the Reporters or not?

¶12

Whether the judgment should be reported in the Digest?

¶13

Present: Mr. Nand Lal Sammi, Advocate for the appellant.

¶14

Mr. Raman Mahajan, Advocate for respondents No.1 and 2.

¶15

Respondent No.3 – deleted.

¶16

��

¶17

Appellant is injured/claimant who while going on his horse/ cart on 11.10.1998 around 1.30 p.m. was hit on the Rajpura/Patiala road by bus bearing registration No.PB/11E/9594 owned by Pepsu Roadways Transport Corporation (PRTC) and driven in a rash and negligent manner by respondent driver Jagbir Singh leading to multiple injuries and registration of the FIR, and has sought

¶18

RATTAN PAL SINGH 2015.01.30 12:34 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document Punjab & Haryana High Court

¶19

¶20

��

¶21

enhancement in compensation so awarded by learned Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Patiala through Award dated 23.11.2001.

¶22

The findings of the learned Tribunal qua issue No.1 as to the culpability of the driver have laid to rest as they were never challenged in the light of arguments of Mr.H.K. Sammi, Advocate on behalf of the claimant/appellant and Mr. Raman Mahajan, Advocate representing respondents No.1 and 2. The sole ground of assailment is quantum of compensation which the claimant/appellant claims is on the lower side. Since onus of this issue was upon the claimant and who has sought to highlight his case that he was earning �200/215 per day and his horse/cart worth �8,000 was damaged and he remained out of his avocation and has testified so as PW/2 and examined his brother PW/1 Bakshish Singh.

¶23

Giving a thoughtful consideration to the arguments of Mr.Nand Lal Sammi, Advocate on behalf of the claimant/appellant and Mr.Raman Mahajan, Advocate representing PRTC. The deposition of PW/3 Leela Dhar from the office of Civil Surgeon has proved disability certificate of the claimant/appellant as Ex.A2. From this all, it stands adequately clear along with MLR Ex.A4 and bed head ticket Ex.A3 that the claimant remained admitted in Government Rajindra Hospital, Patiala. As per this unrebutted evidence, the claimant has suffered disability of permanent nature to the extent of 10% of the right shoulder joint. He has further proved his medical expenses amounting to �5,042. Learned Tribunal has awarded an amount of �33,000 under various heads. It has been rightly contended by the appellant’s

¶24

RATTAN PAL SINGH 2015.01.30 12:34 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document Punjab & Haryana High Court

¶25

¶26

��

¶27

counsel Mr.Nand Lal Sammi that it was certainly not correct appreciation of stand of the claimant. Seeking support from �� !! "# $%�&��'(!��"!)�*�+�"$% ,��)%& !'��%-%!'$� reported in .��/�+�,��0�� , the claimant is certainly entitled to compensation on account of pain and sufferings, actual medical treatment, special diet and on account of loss of income during his hospitalization as well as future loss of earnings and due to permanent disability and which is to be calculated keeping in view 10% permanent disablement. Thus, by some amount of guesswork and hypothetical calculations in the absence of any tangible evidence taking into consideration that it will affect his earnings as a labourer claimant is certainly entitled to compensation under the following heads which the learned Tribunal has failed to take into consideration:

¶28

(A) Pecuniary Compensation

¶29

(i) Compensation assessed on account of �10,000// expenses incurred on hospitalization, medicine, special diet and services of attendant

¶30

(ii) Compensation assessed on account of �30,000// past and future loss of income

¶31

(B) Non/Pecuniary Compensation

¶32

Compensation assessed on account of �10,000// physical pain, mental agony and sense of wrong, loss of beauty and pleasures of life

¶33

Besides this, the claimant/appellant is also entitled to

¶34

interest @7.5% p.a. from the date of filing of the appeal till realization. Interim compensation paid, if any, shall be adjusted.

¶35

RATTAN PAL SINGH 2015.01.30 12:34 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document Punjab & Haryana High Court

¶36

¶37

��

¶38

There is no worthwhile evidence regarding loss suffered by

¶39

the mule/cart as no documentary evidence has been led.

¶40

Rest of the stipulations laid down by the Tribunal need not

¶41

be disturbed.

¶42

In view of the foregoing discussion, the impugned Award is

¶43

modified accordingly and the appeal is allowed in those terms.

No costs.

+��,� ��

��&'-1')��2��.3�

��

RATTAN PAL SINGH 2015.01.30 12:34 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document Punjab & Haryana High Court

Narang Singh v. Jagbir Singh and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Narang Singh v. Jagbir 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

Case details

Similar cases

Charanjit Kaur Vs State of Punjab and Others

Sunil Kumar and Others Vs State of Haryana and Another

Surinder Kumar Vs Harjinder Pal Kaur and Ors.

Mahmood Vs Shahbaz

M/S Kuljit Singh Randhawa Vs Smt. Dharam Kaur and Ors.

Sulochna Devi Vs Gurmeet Singh