Rajat Bansal Vs Janak and Another — Motor Accident Claims | Punjab & Haryana HC (2025)

Rajat Bansal Vs Janak and Another — Motor Accident Claims | Punjab & Haryana HC (2025)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Dismissed

Issue for consideration

Whether the Tribunal erred in awarding a very meagre amount under the heads of pain and suffering, transportation, attendant charges and special diet, warranting enhancement. +1 more

Court's answer

Given the undisputed facts (soft-tissue injury with severe lower backache; spine injuries simple in nature / Lumbar Spine Injury; no disability certificate), the Tribunal's award of Rs. 20,000/- towards pain and suffering suffers from no error.

Ratio / Principle

Of the exorbitantly claimed medical expenses of about Rs. 6,00,000/-, the appellant produced bills for only Rs. 33,308/-, which were duly reimbursed; Rs. 20,000/- was awarded for transportation, special diet and attendant charges even though no bills were produced; apart from bald statements no proof supported the appellant's far-fetched and highly exaggerated claims.

Key takeaways

Nothing is liable to be awarded under the heads of loss of enjoyment of life and loss of expectancy of life, since the appellant has suffered no permanent disability (no disability certificate produced) and no danger to his life expectancy.ratio¶25
Finding no merit whatsoever in the appellant's submissions, the present appeal is dismissed; pending application(s), if any, also stand disposed of.ratio¶25

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 — Section 166 claim — enhancement of compensation — FAO by injured-claimant Rajat Bansal against Award dated 03.05.2025 of Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Jind (MACP No. 52 dated 15.03.2024) granting Rs. 83,308/- with interest @ 9% p.a. for injuries suffered in accident of 09.02.2024 caused by rash/negligent driving of a TATA VISTA owned/driven by respondent No.1 and insured by respondent No.2, who were held jointly and severally liable. Held: injuries were soft-tissue in nature with simple lumbar spine injury per discharge summary Ex. P-12; no permanent disability and no disability certificate produced; medical bills of only Rs. 33,308/- produced and duly reimbursed; Rs. 20,000/- each under pain and suffering and transportation/special diet/attendant charges, and Rs. 10,000/- towards loss of income (income assessed at Rs. 10,924/- p.m. on Minimum Wages Notification dated 22.02.2024 of Labour Commissioner, Haryana), involved no error; nothing payable under heads of loss of enjoyment of life or loss of expectancy of life absent permanent disability or danger to life expectancy. Appeal dismissed; pending applications disposed of.

FAO-4061-2025 (O&M) -1-

IN THE H I GH COURT OF PUNJAB AND H ARYANA AT CHANDIGARH

137 FAO-4061-2025 (O&M) Date of Decision:21.07.2025

Rajat Bansal .…Appellant

Versus

Janak and a nother ....Respondents

CORAM: HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE NIDHI GUPTA

Present: - Mr. Mayank Gupta, Advocate for the appellant. NIDHI GUPTA, J.

Present appeal has been filed b y the injured-claimant seeking enhancem e nt of compensation of Rs.83, 3 08/- awarded by the learned Motor Ac c ident Claims Tribunal, Jind (he r einafter ‘the learned Tribunal’) vide impu g ned Award dated03.05.2025 p assed in MACP Case No. 52 dated 15.03.2024, filed under Section 1 6 6 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988.

Brief facts of the case are t h at the learned Tribunal on the basis of p l eadings and oral & document a ry evidence adduced before it concluded that the injured-claimant had suffered injuries in a motor vehicular a ccident that took place on 09.0 2 .2024 at about 8:40 A.M., due to the ra s h and negligent driving of TATA VISTA Car bearing registratio n No. HR-12-S-5637 (for sh o rt-‘the offending car’) being driven and owned by respondent No. 1 a n d insured by respondent No. 2. The afore s aid compensation was granted along with interest @ 9% per annum. The respondents No.1 and 2 were h eld jointly and severally liable to pay the a mount of compensation.

RISHU KATARIA 2025.07.24 09:16 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/judgment.

FAO-4061-2025 (O&M) -2-

Learned counsel for the ap p ellant seeks enhancement of compensat i on, inter alia, on the ground th a t the ld. Tribunal had awarded a very m eager amount under the H e ads of pain and suffering, transportat i on, attendant charges and spec i al diet. It is submitted that the Tribunal h as erred in not granting any compensation to the injuredappellant u nder the Heads of loss of e x pectancy of life and loss of enjoyment of life. It is submitted that the a ppellant had suffered grievous Lumbar S p ine Injury in the accident in q uestion, yet nothing has been awarded t o the appellant under the afor e said heads. The appellant had even rem a ined hospitalized for many d ays after the accident. It is accordingl y , prayed that the impugn e d Award be modified and compensat i on awarded to the appellant be e nhanced. 4. No other argument is made o n behalf of the appellant. 5. I have heard ld. Counsel and perused the case file. I find no merit whatsoever in the submissions made on behalf of the appellant.

Perusal of the record reveals that it was the pleaded case of the appell a nt before the learned Tribunal t h at the appellant along with one Amit (clai m ant in connected MACP No. 5 3 dated 15.03.2024 - which is also dispo s ed of by the learned Tribunal, v ide common impugned Award dated 03.0 5 .2025) were going from their h o use on the motorcycle of Amit bearing re g istration No. HR-31-P-0746. T he said motorcycle was being driven by t he appellant while Amit was ri d ing pillion. It was alleged that at about 8 :40 A.M., when they crossed Christ Raja Convent School, Narwana, J ind, respondent No. 1 while d r iving the offending car at high speed in a rash and negligent manner c a me from behind and hit their

RISHU KATARIA 2025.07.24 09:16 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/judgment.

FAO-4061-2025 (O&M) -3-

motorcycl e , as a result of which, the app e llant fell on the road whereas Amit got e n tangled underneath the car. It i s pleaded that respondent No. 1 had stopped the offending car at some dist a nce and the passersby took out Amit from underneath the car and shifted b oth, the appellant and Amit, to Metro Hospital, Jind for treatment. FIR N o . 0068 dated 09.02.2024 under Sections 2 7 9, 337 and 338 PC was regist e red at Police Station City, Jind regarding t he accident in question on the s t atement of Amit Kumar. It was further ple a ded on behalf of the appellant t h at due to his serious condition, the appell a nt was shifted from Metro Hospital Jind to O.P. Jindal, Institute o f Cancer and Cardiac Research Hospital, Hisar on 10.02.2024 where he r emained admitted up to 12.02.2024. It was pleaded that the appellant h ad spend a sum of ₹6,00,000/- o n his treatment, transportation, special diet etc., and more amount is like l y to be spent on his treatment even in f u ture. Further, it was pleaded t hat the appellant was earning ₹40,000/- p er month by doing scrap busin e ss, but due to injuries suffered by him, h e has become permanently disa b led and was even unable to do his daily r o utine work. Accordingly, a su m of ₹ 80 lakhs was claimed as compensat i on.

Despite the exaggerated cla i ms made by the appellant in respect of t he injuries allegedly suffered b y him in the accident question, as per the e vidence on record, at the time o f admission in Metro Hospital Jind the a ppellant had suffered ‘ soft ti s sue injury with severe lower backache ’. At the time, the appellant w a s also complaining of pain in facial region and chest. The appellant w as discharged from the said hospital o n 10.02.2024; whereafter he w as shifted to Jindal Hospital,

RISHU KATARIA 2025.07.24 09:16 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/judgment.

FAO-4061-2025 (O&M) -4-

Hisar. As per discharge summary (Ex . P-12) received from Jindal Hospital, H isar, the appellant was ad m itted in the said hospital on 11.02.202 4 and was found to have suffe r ed ‘spine injuries which were simple in nature’/ Lumbar Spine Injury. Accordingly, appellant was discharged from the hospital on 12.02. 2 024 itself. As per the MRI conducted on the appellant, the normal c u rvature of LS Spine was found straighten e d; Multilevel Posterior Disc B u lges at L1-L2, L3-L4, L4-L5 and L5-S1 levels compressing Anterior T echal Sac; Posterior Annular Tear at L 4 -L5 and L8-S1 levels were fo u nd. The appellant was advised complete bed rest and physiotherapy. Although, the appellant has contended that he had suffered permane n t disability, however, there is nothing o n record to remotely indicate a n ything to this effect. Even the appellant h as produced no Disability Cer t ificate. Thus, ld. Tribunal has awarded₹ 2 0,000/- as compensation towar d s pain and suffering. Given the above und i sputed facts, I find no error in t h e same. 8. Further, notwithstanding th e exorbitant medical expenses claimed to have been incurred by the app e llant to the tune of ₹6,00,000/,the appell a nt has produced medical bills for only₹33,308/-; which were duly reim b ursed by the Tribunal. The app e llant has demanded₹1,00,000/towards tr a nsportation, special diet, atten d ant charges etc. However, the Tribunal has awarded ₹20,000/- for the s a me even though no bills were produced b y the appellant in order to sho w any expenses incurred by him under the s aid Heads. Thus, except for bal d statements, no proof has been produced b y the appellant in support of hi s far-fetched claims which seem to be highl y exaggerated.

RISHU KATARIA 2025.07.24 09:16 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/judgment.

FAO-4061-2025 (O&M) -5-

It was also claimed by the a p pellant that he was doing the business o f scrap and earning ₹40,000/- p e r month. However, no proof of income w a s produced by the appellant. Yet, the Tribunal had assessed the income of the appellant as ₹10,924/- per m onth on the basis of Minimum Wages N otification dated 22.02.202 4 , issued by the Labour Commissi o ner, Haryana. Further, althoug h nothing was shown to suggest that any lo s s of income had accrued to the appellant due to the accident in question, y et, the Tribunal has granted ₹1 0 ,000/- towards loss of income. Thereby g r anting total compensation of ₹83,308/- along with interest @ 9% per an n um.

It has been contended by le a rned counsel for the appellant that nothi n g has been awarded towar d s loss of enjoyment of life. However, the appellant has not shown a n ything to indicate that he has suffered a n y lack in the enjoyment of life due to the accident. It has also been cont e nded that nothing has been a w arded towards life expectancy. However, the appellant has not suffere d any permanent disability, let alone any d anger to his life expectancy. A s such, nothing is liable to be awarded t o the appellant under the aforesa i d heads. 11. In view of the above, the pres e nt appeal is dismissed. 12. Pending application(s), if any also stand(s) disposed of.

Whether speaking/reasoned Yes/No

Whether Reportable Yes/No

RISHU KATARIA 2025.07.24 09:16 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/judgment.