Dismissed¶27

Salender v. Rajender and Ors.

Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 – S.166 – Enhancement of compensation

Punjab & Haryana HC23 Dec 2025FAO/426/2025

Download

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

FAO-426-2025 (O&M), High Court of Punjab and Haryana at Chandigarh, decided 23.12.2025 by Nidhi Gupta, J. Injured-claimant's appeal for enhancement of Rs.93,749/- compensation awarded by MACT Jhajjar (Award dated 24.12.2024, MACP No. 91 under S.166 MV Act) for accident of 12.02.2023 caused by Trax Cruiser HR-69B-9493. Enhancement sought on medical expenses, loss of income, special diet, pain and suffering, and interest (9% to 12%). Held: no permanent disability, medical bills of Rs.23,749/- reimbursed, no proof of income yet loss-of-income granted; no ground to interfere — appeal dismissed.

What did the court decide?

The Court found no merit in the submissions made on behalf of the appellant seeking enhancement of compensation. ¶17

Salender Vs Rajender and Ors. — Motor Accident Claims | Punjab & Haryana HC (2025)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Dismissed

¶27

Issue for consideration

Whether the compensation of Rs.93,749/- awarded by the Tribunal (on the heads of medical expenses, loss of income, special diet and pain and suffering) ought to be enhanced, and whether the rate of interest ought to have been 12% per annum instead of 9% per annum.

¶16

Court's answer

The Court found no merit in the submissions made on behalf of the appellant seeking enhancement of compensation.

¶17

Ratio / Principle

It is an admitted fact on record that the appellant did not suffer any permanent disability in the accident; counsel was unable to state the exact nature of the injuries, and the appellant was admitted in hospital only on 12.02.2023, the date of the accident.

¶18

Key takeaways

The medical bills Ex.P4 to Ex.P9 for Rs.23,749/- had duly been reimbursed by the learned Tribunal, so no enhancement of medical expenses was warranted.ratio¶18
The appellant failed to place on record any authentic proof of income, and counsel could not apprise the Court of the nature of his employment; yet the Tribunal had already awarded Rs.10,000/- towards loss of income.ratio¶25
No ground was made out to interfere with the impugned Award, and the appeal was dismissed; pending application(s), if any, stand disposed of.ratio

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 — S.166 — Enhancement of compensation — Injured-claimant's appeal against Award dated 24.12.2024 of MACT, Jhajjar (MACP No. 91, dated 16.03.2023) awarding Rs.93,749/- with interest @ 9% p.a. for injuries suffered in accident of 12.02.2023 involving Trax Cruiser HR-69B-9493 — Held: (i) admitted on record that appellant suffered no permanent disability; counsel unable to state nature of injuries; appellant hospitalised only on the date of accident; (ii) medical bills Ex.P4–Ex.P9 of Rs.23,749/- duly reimbursed by the Tribunal; (iii) no authentic proof of income placed on record, yet Rs.10,000/- awarded towards loss of income — no ground made out to interfere with the impugned Award — appeal dismissed; pending application(s) disposed of. (NIDHI GUPTA, J.)

¶1

FAO-426-2025(O&M) - 1 -

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH

¶3

125 FAO-426-2025 (O&M) Date of decision: 23.12.2025

Salender

...Appellant(s)

Vs.

Rajender and others ...Respondent(s)

¶8

CORAM: HON’BLE MS. JUSTICE NIDHI GUPTA

¶9

Present:Mr. Saurabh Dalal, Advocate for the appellant.

¶10

¶11

NIDHI GUPTA, J.

¶12

The present appeal has been filed by the injured-claimant seeking enhancement of compensation of Rs.93,749/- awarded by the learned Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Jhajjar (for short “the learned Tribunal”) vide Award dated 24.12.2024 passed in MACP Case No. 91 dated 16.03.2023 filed under Section 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988.

¶13

Brief facts of the case are that the learned 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 12.02.2023 due to the rash and negligent driving of a Trax Cruiser bearing registration No. HR-69B-9493 (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 @ 9% per annum. All the respondents were jointly and severally held liable to pay the amount of compensation.

¶14

DIVYANSHI 2025.12.24 13:26 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document

¶15

FAO-426-2025(O&M) - 2 -

¶16

Learned counsel for the appellant seeks enhancement of compensation by submitÝng that learned Tribunal has awarded medical expenses on the lower side. Even loss of income has been calculated on the lower side. The amount awarded on the special diet and pain and suffering are also on the lower side. Rate of interest ought to have been 12% per annum instead of 9% per annum. He accordingly prays for modification of Award/enhancement of compensation.

¶17

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

¶18

Perusal of the record of the case shows that it is admitted fact on record that in the accident in question, the appellant has not suffered any permanent disability. In fact, learned counsel for the appellant is unable to inform this Court as to the exact nature of injuries suffered by the appellant in the accident in question. As per the treatment record of the appellant Ex.P3, appellant had been admitted in hospital only on 12.02.2023 i.e. the date of accident. Further, Appellant had produced medical bills Ex.P4 to Ex.P9 for an amount of Rs.23,749/-, which had duly been reimbursed by the learned Tribunal. Accordingly, keeping in view above facts, learned Tribunal has awarded compensation in the following

¶19

manner: -

¶20

Sr. No.	Heads	Calculation(in Rs.)
(i)	Medical expenses	Rs.23,749/-
(ii)	Transportation charges	Rs.20,000/-
(iii)	Special Diet	Rs.10,000/-
(iv)	Pain and suffering	Rs.30,000/-
(v)	Loss of Income	Rs.10,000/-

¶21

DIVYANSHI 2025.12.24 13:26 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document

¶22

FAO-426-2025(O&M) - 3 -

¶23

Total Rs.93,749/-

¶24

It has also been categorically found by the learned Tribunal that

¶25

the appellant has failed to place on record any authentic proof of his income. Even before this Court, learned counsel for the appellant is unable to apprise this Court as to the nature of the employment of the appellant. Yet, learned Tribunal has awarded ₹10,000/– towards loss of income.

¶26