Allowed

Gurbax Lal v. State of Haryana

Punjab & Haryana HC26 Mar 2014FAO/322/1988

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court Four Appellate Order (FAO No.322 of 1988) regarding a 1986 motor vehicle accident between Punjab and Haryana Roadways vehicles. The judge recalled a previous order to allow a fresh assessment of liability and compensation. The court found the claimant contributorily negligent but adjusted the liability split from 80:20 to 50:50 based on evidence of the Haryana Roadways bus taking a

What did the court decide?

Compensation assessed at 70,000; after 50% abatement for contributory negligence, the liability is 35,000 with interest at 7.5% payable to the appellant, and the appeal is allowed to that extent.

Gurbax Lal Vs State of Haryana — Writ and Judicial Review | Punjab & Haryana HC (2014)

¶1

-1-

¶2

FAO No.322 of 1988 (O&M)

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATES OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH

¶4

FAO No.322 of 1988 (O&M) Date of Decision.26.03.2014

Gurbax Lal

......Appellant

Versus

The State of Haryana and others

¶9

......Respondents

¶10

Present: Mr. Arun Bansal, Advocate for the appellant.

¶11

Mr. Gourav Verma, AAG, Haryana.

¶12

CORAM:HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE K. KANNAN

¶13

Whether Reporters of local papers may be allowed to see the judgment ?

¶14

To be referred to the Reporters or not ?

¶15

Whether the judgment should be reported in the Digest?

¶16

-.-

¶17

K. KANNAN J.(ORAL)

¶18

C.M. No.4858-CII of 2014

¶19

For the reasons stated in the application, order passed by this Court on 22.01.2014 is recalled and the appeal is restored to its original number.

¶20

Application is allowed.

¶21

FAO No.322 of 1988

¶22

I directed the State Counsel to take notice and also had a

¶23

copy of the judgment supplied. Since the appeal is of the year 1988 and the accident had taken place in the year 1986, I have proceeded to take up the case for disposal with the consent of both counsel.

¶24

The claimant was a driver of Punjab Roadways who while driving the vehicle dashed against another vehicle belonging to the

¶25

Kamboj Pankaj Kumar 2014.03.28 11:22 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document Chandigarh

¶26

FAO No.322 of 1988 (O&M)

¶27

-2-

¶28

Haryana Raodways coming from the opposite direction. The contention of the claimant was that it was the driver of the Haryana Raodways bus who was responsible for the accident, in that he had come to the wrong side of the road and dashed against the vehicle he was driving. The driver of the Haryana Roadways was also examined as RW2 who gave evidence to the effect that he had actually turned to the left side to another road and that was when the claimant dashed against him. The Tribunal rejected both these contentions and held that the rough plan produced before the Tribunal showed that the collision had been at the middle of the road. It found the larger slice of liability for the claimant and apportioned the same as 80:20 between him and the driver of the Haryana Roadways. If the contention of driver of the Haryana Roadways was rejected by the Tribunal that the Haryana Roadways bus had actually taken a left turn when the collision had taken place then it must only be taken that a head on collision at the middle of the road as a result of contributory negligence of the claimant which could be apportioned at no more than 50%. I will, therefore, modify the assessment made by the Tribunal already as above.

¶29

The claimant was said to have been hospitalized for a period of 6 days and later taking treatment for six months. He had, however, reported on duty after three months. He was a driver and if there was evidence that he had reported to duty after three months, I will take that he had resumed duty as a driver after three months and his disability lasted till that time. However, the doctor who had examined him gave evidence to the effect that there had been a shortening of limb by two inches and he had a 50% disability. I will rework the Kamboj Pankaj Kumar 2014.03.28 11:22 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document Chandigarh

¶30

-3-

¶31

FAO No.322 of 1988 (O&M)

¶32

compensation to provide for a compensation of ` 50,000/- for loss of amenities that is caused to him for the rest of his life by shortening of the limb. I will rework the compensation and assess the total amount through the table as under:-

¶33

		INJURY CASES
Age		48 years
Period o	f Hosp	italization 6 days
Occupat	ion
		Heads of claim	Tribunal	High Court
Sl. No.			Amount (Rs)	Amount (Rs.)
1		Loss of income	6000	6000
2		Medical expenses
	(i)	Medicines		5000
	(ii)	Hospital Charges
	(iii)	Attendant Charges		2000
	(iv)	Special Diet		2000
	(v)	Transportation
3		Pain & Suffering-	7500	10,000
4		Disability	50%	50%
5		Loss of earning capacity income
		Multiplier
		% of loss of earning capacity
6.		Loss of amenities		50,000
7		Reduction in life expectancy
8		Loss of prospect of marriage
		Total		70,000

¶34

The total amount determined is ` 70,000/- and making 50%

¶35

abatement for the percentage of contributory negligence attributed to him, the amount payable will be ` 35000/- with interest @7.5% to the extent to which it is an addition to the amount which has already been granted by the Tribunal.

¶36

The award stands modified and the appeal is allowed to the

¶37

Kamboj Pankaj Kumar 2014.03.28 11:22 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document Chandigarh

¶38

FAO No.322 of 1988 (O&M)

¶39

-4-

¶40

above extent. The liability shall be on the Haryana Roadways to the

¶41

above extent.

¶42

(K. KANNAN) JUDGE March 26, 2014 Pankaj*

¶43

Kamboj Pankaj Kumar 2014.03.28 11:22 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document Chandigarh

Gurbax Lal v. State of Haryana

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Gurbax Lal v. State of Haryana

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

Sanjiv Kumar Vs Balwant Kaur and Others

Surjit Dass and Anr. Vs Hardev Singh and Anr.

Union of India Vs Samlesh and Ors.

Beant Kaur and Others Vs Amrik Singh and Others

Pushpa Devi Vs Suba Singh

State of Hy. Vs Rajbala