The Punjab and Haryana High Court dismissed an appeal seeking enhancement of compensation awarded by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal for a fatal accident. The Court held that no interference was required. Delay in filing was condoned.
Appeal dismissed with no order as to cost.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
FAO No.5081 of 2016(O&M)
[1]
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH
FAO No. 5081 of 2016(O&M) Date of Decision: November 28 , 2019.
Mamta and others ...... APPELLANT (s) Versus Rattan Lal and others ...... RESPONDENT (s)
CORAM:- HON'BLE MRS.JUSTICE LISA GILL
Present: Mr. K.S.Dhanora, Advocate for the appellants.
LISA GILL, J.
CM No.17473-CII of 2016
There is a delay of 11 days in filing of the appeal.
For the reasons mentioned in the application, duly supported by an affidavit of the applicant, as well as arguments addressed, delay of 11 days in filing of the appeal is condoned.
Application is disposed of.
FAO No.5081 of 2016
This is an appeal preferred by the claimants seeking enhancement of compensation awarded to them by the learned Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Kurukshetra (for short, the 'Tribunal') vide impugned award dated 10.12.2015 on account of death of Naveen Kumar in a motor vehicle accident which took place on 11.02.2015. A petition under Sections 166/140 of the Motor Vehicles Act,
OMKAR SINGH 2019.12.03 10:51 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document High Court, Chandigarh
FAO No.5081 of 2016(O&M)
[2]
1988 was filed by the appellants claiming compensation of `35,00,000/-.
Learned Tribunal on consideration of the facts and evidence on record, awarded a total sum of 18,17,358/- to the appellants. Income of the deceased-Naveen Kumar was assessed as 9,900/- per month by the learned Tribunal while considering the fact that he was a regular student of Civil Engineering. The deceased was held to be 20 years old at the time of the accident. An increment at the rate of 50% was afforded on account of future prospects. Deduction to the extent of 50% was effected on account of personal expenses and multiplier of 18 was applied. 1,88,558/- was awarded on account of medical expenses, which were proved on record. A sum of 25,000/- was awarded towards transportation and funeral expenses.
Learned counsel for the appellants fairly states that in view of the judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in National Insurance Company Limited v. Pranay Sethi and others, 2017(16) SCC 680 , there is no scope for any further enhancement of the total compensation awarded to the appellants by the learned Tribunal.
No interference is called for in impugned award dated 10.12.2015 passed by learned Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Kurukshetra.
Consequently, this appeal is dismissed with no order as to cost.
( LISA GILL ) November 28 , 2019. JUDGE ‘om’ Whether speaking/reasoned: Yes/No Whether reportable: Yes/No
OMKAR SINGH 2019.12.03 10:51 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document High Court, Chandigarh
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the appeal for enhancement of compensation should be allowed despite the judgment in National Insurance Company Limited v. Pranay Sethi and others.
Colour shows how this judgement treated each authority
National Insurance Company Limited v. Pranay Sethi and othersReferred¶21
National Insurance Company Limited v. Pranay Sethi and others, 2017(16) SCC 680 · Who else cites this
1 provisions across 1 enactments
Mamta and others
Rattan Lal and others
Lisa Gill
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
