Dismissed¶36

Bhan Singh v. Jasvir Singh and Ors.

Punjab & Haryana HC11 Sept 2025FAO/2500/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

FAO-2500-2023 (O&M); Punjab and Haryana High Court; motor accident claim; enhancement of compensation; Section 166 Motor Vehicles Act 1988; MACT Patiala; permanent disability not proved; driving licence expired before accident; loss of earnings as Driver; hospitalization and ICU stay; pain and suffering; attendant charges; head injury not proved; interest enhancement from 7% to 18% refused; appeal dismissed.

What did the court decide?

None; the appeal was dismissed and the impugned Award of the learned Tribunal stands unaltered. ¶36

Bhan Singh Vs Jasvir Singh and Ors. — Motor Accident Claims | Punjab & Haryana HC (2025)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

None; the appeal was dismissed and the impugned Award of the learned Tribunal stands unaltered.

¶36

Issue for consideration

Whether the total compensation of Rs.3,23,221/- awarded by the Tribunal requires enhancement having regard to the appellant's alleged permanent disability, inability to work as a Driver, 41-day hospitalization/ICU stay, requirement of an attendant, and loss of amenities. +2 more

¶17

Court's answer

On the date of the accident (24.12.2019) the appellant did not possess a valid driving licence (Ex.R1 valid only up to 27.07.2019) and produced no other evidence of employment as a Driver; his plea of loss of earnings as a working Driver earning Rs.15,000/- p.m. therefore fails.

¶29

Ratio / Principle

No evidence was adduced to show that the claimant Bhan Singh was rendered permanently disabled, as categorically found by the learned Tribunal in para 16 of the impugned Award; the disability-based enhancement claim fails.

¶29

Key takeaways

In view of the appellant's hospitalization from 24.12.2019 to 03.02.2020 and ICU stay from 24.12.2019 to 31.01.2020, the learned Tribunal correctly awarded Rs.2 lakhs towards pain and suffering, Rs.25,000/- towards special diet, Rs.15,000/- towards attendant charges and Rs.10,000/- towards transportation, besides medical expenses of Rs.73,221.50 proved from bills Ex.C2 to Ex.C137.ratio¶30
No record with regard to any head injury was referred to either in the claim petition or before this Court; the head-injury/loss-of-expectation-of-life contention is rejected.ratio¶34

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Enhancement of compensation -- injured-claimant's appeal dismissed. The appellant, injured in a motor accident of 24.12.2019 involving Car No. HR-41-J-8002, had been awarded Rs.3,23,221/- by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Patiala (Award dated 20.02.2023 in MACP Case No. 153 dated 29.07.2020, under Section 166, Motor Vehicles Act, 1988): Rs.2 lakhs towards pain and suffering, Rs.25,000/- special diet, Rs.15,000/- attendant charges, Rs.10,000/- transportation and Rs.73,221.50 medical expenses, with interest @ 7% per annum, all respondents held jointly and severally liable. Held: (i) the appellant's driving licence expired on 27.07.2019, before the accident, and no other evidence of employment as a Driver was produced, so the loss-of-earnings plea failed; (ii) as categorically found by the Tribunal, no evidence proved permanent disability; (iii) the component awards, made in view of hospitalization from 24.12.2019 to 03.02.2020 and ICU stay up to 31.01.2020, were correct; (iv) no record of any head injury was referred to in the claim petition or before the Court; and (v) no merit was found in the prayer for enhancement of interest to 18% per annum. No ground made out to interfere; appeal dismissed, pending applications disposed of.

¶1

FAO-2500-2023 (O&M) - 1 -

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH

¶3

121 FAO-2500-2023 (O&M) Date of decision: 11.09.2025

¶4

Bhan Singh ...Appellant(s)

¶5

Vs.

¶6

Jasvir Singh and others ...Respondent(s)

¶7

CORAM: HON’BLE MS. JUSTICE NIDHI GUPTA

¶8

Present:Ms. Gurnam Kaur Turka, Advocate for the appellant.

¶9

¶10

NIDHI GUPTA, J.

¶11

The present appeal has been filed by the injured-claimant seeking enhancement of compensation of Rs.3,23,221/- awarded by the learned Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Patiala (for short “the learned Tribunal”) vide Award dated 20.02.2023 passed in MACP Case No. 153 dated 29.07.2020 filed under Section 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988.

¶12

Fresh Vakalatnama on behalf of the appellant with ‘No Objection’ from earlier counsel filed in Court today, is taken on record.

¶13

Brief facts of the case are that the ld. Tribunal on the basis of evidence adduced by the parties concluded that the appellant had suffered injuries in a motor vehicular accident that took place on 24.12.2019 due to the rash and negligent driving of a Car bearing registration No. HR-41-J-8002 (hereinafter referred to as “the offending vehicle”) being driven by respondent No.1; owned by respondent No.2; and insured by respondent No.3. The above said compensation was awarded along with interest @ 7%

¶14

DIVYANSHI 2025.09.15 18:22 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document

¶15

FAO-2500-2023 (O&M) - 2 -

¶16

per annum. All the respondents were held jointly and severally liable to pay the compensation.

¶17

Learned counsel for the appellant seeks enhancement of compensation by submitting that in the accident in question, the appellant had suffered multiple grievous injuries and has been rendered permanently disabled. Yet, meager amount of Rs.3,23,221/- has been awarded to the appellant. It is submitted that prior to the accident, appellant was working as a Driver and earning Rs.15,000/-p.m. It is submitted that due to the disability suffered by the appellant, he cannot sit, stand and walk properly and has become dependent upon others. He is still under treatment and bedridden and, therefore, one attendant is permanently required to look after the appellant. He is unable to work; but these facts have not been considered by learned Tribunal while passing the impugned Award. Moreover, interest has been awarded @ 7% only and the same deserves to be enhanced @ 18% p.a.

¶18

Learned counsel for the appellant further submits that the Ld. Tribunal has gravely erred in law while awarding compensation as the claimant remained admitted in hospital from 24.12.2019 to 3.2.2020 and further he remained in the ICU from 24.12.2019 to 31.01.2020. He had suffered several fractures and he was operated upon as per the record produced from GMCH Sector 32, Chandigarh. i.e. for a period of 41 days. Therefore, the impugned Award needs modification on this account.

¶19

It is also submitted that in the accident in question, appellant had also suffered head injury. Therefore, there was loss of expectation of life

¶20

DIVYANSHI 2025.09.15 18:22 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document

¶21

FAO-2500-2023 (O&M) - 3 -

¶22

of the appellant; as also loss of amenities. It is accordingly prayed that the present appeal be allowed; and the compensation be enhanced in the above manner.

¶23

No other argument is raised on behalf of the appellant. I have heard ld. counsel and perused the case file in detail. I find no merit in the submissions made on behalf of the appellant.

¶24

The case as pleaded by the appellant in claim petition before

¶25

the Tribunal as recorded in para 3 of the impugned Award is as follows:-

¶26

“It has been further averred that the accident took place entirely due to the rash and negligent driving of car bearing no. HR-41-J-8002 by respondent no. 1. Claimant was aged about 63 years and was hale and hearty at the time of accident. He was working as a driver and was earning Rs. 15,000/- per month. He suffered multiple, simple and grievous injuries including fracture of left shoulder and left elbow dislocation, fracture of right leg below knee, right limb fracture and head injuries. He became permanently disabled and is unable to do any work. He cannot sit, stand and walk properly and has become dependent upon others. He is still under treatment and is bed ridden. He has spent more than Rs. 10 lakh on his treatment, transportation, special diet, attendants, etc. One attendant is required to look after him permanently. All the respondents being driver, owner and insurer of the offending vehicle are jointly and severally liable to pay the compensation. Hence, the claim petition has been filed for seeking compensation to the tune of Rs. 30 Lacs along with interest @ 18% per annum.”

¶27

DIVYANSHI 2025.09.15 18:22 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document

¶28

FAO-2500-2023 (O&M) - 4 -

¶29

Although the appellant had pleaded that he was working as a Driver, however, appellant has admitted that his driving license Ex.R1 was valid upto 27.07.2019; whereas the accident had taken place on 24.12.2019. As such on the date of accident, appellant did not possess even the valid driving license, what to talk of employment as a Driver. Besides this, no other evidence was produced by the appellant to prove his employment as a driver. It has also been submitted by the appellant that he had become permanently disabled due to the accident in question. However, it is a clear and categoric finding of the learned Tribunal in para 16 of the impugned Award that “ No evidence has been adduced to show that Bhan Singh the claimant has been rendered permanently disabled.”

¶30

It has also been contended by the appellant that he remained hospitalized for 41 days. In this regard, learned Tribunal has duly recorded in para 21 of the Award that appellant had remained in hospital from 24.12.2019 to 03.02.2020 and further he remained in the ICU from 24.12.2019 to 31.01.2020. Keeping in view the said fact, the learned Tribunal had therefore, correctly awarded a sum of Rs.2 lakhs towards pain and suffering; and Rs.25,000/- towards special diet. Learned Tribunal had further awarded Rs.15,000/- towards attendant charges; and Rs.10,000/towards transportation. Medical expenses as proved from bills Ex.C2 to Ex.C137 for an amount of Rs.73,221.50 were awarded; thereby granting total compensation of Rs.3,23,221/-.

¶31