Appeal for enhancement of compensation in a motor accident claim was dismissed. The delay in filing was condoned only for 6 days (not 454 days). The court found no merit in enhancing compensation as the deceased's income was not proven, and the Tribunal correctly assessed it based on DC rates.
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-1243-2024 Page 1 of 5
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH 122
FAO-1243-2024(O&M) Date of decision: 12.02.2026
Abdul Gaffar & Another
...Appellant(s)
Vs.
Hardeep Singh & Another
...Respondent(s)
CORAM: HON’BLE MS. JUSTICE NIDHI GUPTA
Present:Mr. Kamal Chaudhary, Advocate for the appellants.
NIDHI GUPTA, J. CM-4975-CII-2024
This is an application under Section 151 CPC for condonation of
delay of 454 days in re-filing the appeal.
The only reason given for condoning such inordinate delay is:
“2. That the present appeal had been filed before this Hon’ble court on 30.05.2022 but certain objections were raised by the Registry on 454. After receiving paper book from the registry of this Hon’ble Court the brief of the present case was misplaced by the clerk.”
The Law of Limitation is enacted with a purpose, as a handmaid of Justice and cannot be ignored/reduced to an ineffective piece of legislation by giving it the complete go-by. With passage of time, rights of the parties get crystallised. It is the bounden duty of every litigant to
SUNENA 2026.02.13 18:34 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document
FAO-1243-2024 Page 2 of 5
pursue his case diligently; and it is also the bounden duty of this Court to ensure that justice inures to both parties concerned.
No details have been forthcoming either from the application or from the accompanying affidavit as to on what date was the file misplaced or on what date was it found.
It is my considered view that keeping in mind the totality of the
facts and circumstances of the case, the reasons cited by the applicant for condonation of delay, do not constitute sufficient cause. In view of above, present application is dismissed.
CM-4976-CII-2024
This is an application under Section 5 of Limitation Act read along with Section 151 CPC for condonation of delay of 6 days in filing the appeal.
After going through the contents of the application, which is supported by affidavit of appellant No.1, the same is allowed subject to all just exceptions and delay of 6 days in filing the present appeal is condoned.
MAIN CASE
Present appeal has been filed by the claimants seeking enhancement of compensation of Rs.21,85,544/- awarded by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Panchkula (hereinafter ‘the learned Tribunal’) vide Award dated 30.03.2022 passed in MACP Case No.3 dated 13.01.2020 filed under Section 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act (hereinafter “the Act”).
SUNENA 2026.02.13 18:34 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document
FAO-1243-2024 Page 3 of 5
The two claimants are the 46-year-old father and 44-year-old mother of
deceased Akhtar, who was 18 years old at the time of accident.
SUNENA 2026.02.13 18:34 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document
FAO-1243-2024 Page 4 of 5
heard learned counsel and perused the case file in detail. I find no merit in the submissions advanced on behalf of the appellants.
SUNENA 2026.02.13 18:34 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document
FAO-1243-2024 Page 5 of 5
Further, as deceased was a bachelor, deduction of 50% was correctly made
towards personal expenses (Rs.19,218/-/2 = Rs.9,609/-). Learned Tribunal correctly applied multiplier of 18 (Rs.9,609/- x 12 x 18 = Rs.20,75,544/-). Under the conventional heads, the learned Tribunal had awarded Rs.15,000/towards funeral expenses; Rs.15,000/- towards loss of estate; and Rs.40,000/- each to both the claimants by way of filial consortium; thereby granting total compensation of Rs.21,85,544/-.
12.02.2026 (Nidhi Gupta) Sunena Judge
Whether speaking/reasoned: Yes/No Whether reportable: Yes/No
SUNENA 2026.02.13 18:34 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the delay in filing the appeal was sufficiently condoned?
Whether the compensation awarded by the Tribunal was justified?
3 provisions across 3 enactments
Abdul Gaffar & Another
Hardeep Singh & Another
Nidhi Gupta
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
