Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.
FAO-1907-20 IN THE H 112
Som Nath
Surjit Singh and Ors
CORAM :HON'BL Present: Ms. Arc for the a
Mr. Pard Ms. Ayu
for respo AMARINDER SING
1. The present enhancement o Claims Tribu Tribunal”) vid along with int petition till rea appellant in a occurred due t No. HR-37-A
2. The brief facts years, sustaine set up, while h about 9:00 a.m bearing registr 2005 (O&M)
THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB A CHANDIGARH
Versus Ors
N'BLE MR. JUSTICE AMARINDE s. Archana Chauhan, Advocate, r the appellant. r. Pardeep Goyal, Advocate, with s. Ayushi Jain, Advocate, & r respondent No.3-Insurance Company
*** SINGH GREWAL, J. (ORAL) esent appeal has been filed by th ment of the compensation awarded b Tribunal, Chandigarh (hereinafter vide award dated 17.03.2005, w ith interest @ 9% per annum from t till realization was awarded on accou t in a motor vehicular accident dat due to the rash and negligent drivin A-3039 by respondent No.2. f facts of the case are that the claim stained injuries in a road accident date hile he was going on his bicycle tow :00 a.m. and when he reached near registration No. HR-37A-3039 came f
JAB AND HARYANA AT
FAO-1907-2005 (O&M) Date of decision-08.04.2026 ...Appellant
... Respondents INDER SINGH GREWAL mpany. by the claimant-appellant seeking rded by the learned Motor Accident after referred to as “the learned 05, whereby a sum of ₹4,02,700/- from the date of filing of the claim account of injuries sustained by the nt dated 04.07.2002. The accident driving of truck bearing registration claimant–Som Nath, aged about 43 dated 04.07.2002. As per the case le towards Sector-26, Chandigarh at near the G.T. light point, a truck came from behind and struck against
king ident rned - laim y the ident ation t 43 case rh at truck ainst ANIL KUMAR 2026.04.23 14:46 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document
FAO-1907-20 his bicycle. Th @ Sanjeev Ku fell down and Institute of M where he rem course of treat record (Ex.P1 12.09.2002, 22.05.2003, as claimant incur to pay ₹850/- the rate of ₹10 thereafter con Hospital, whe 05.12.2002 as ₹50,000/- on p cost of artific certificate (Ex time of accide a Beldar on da to work for a
2005 (O&M) cle.
The said vehicle was being drive ev Kumar in a rash and negligent man n and sustained multiple injuries an of Medical Education and Researc e remained admitted from 04.07.200 f treatment, his right leg was amputat Ex.P1), and he had also visited PG 02, 18.09.2002, 12.12.2002, 15 03, as reflected in (Ex.P1). It has fu t incurred expenses on treatment and - per visit, and also incurred expen ₹100/- per day. He also required a r continued follow-up treatment and , where he was admitted on 25.11. 02 as per file certificate (Ex.P2). It is on purchasing medicines and taking artificial leg was assessed at ₹10,260 te (Ex.R-46), the claimant suffered 45 accident, the claimant was about 43 ye r on daily wages earning about ₹120/ for about six months. FIR (Ex.PB
driven by respondent No.2–Sanjay nt manner. Resultantly, the claimant ries and was taken to Postgraduate arch, Chandigarh for treatment, .07.2002 to 25.07.2002. During the putated, as is evident from medical ed PGI on 08.08.2002, 28.08.2002, , 15.02.2003, 19.05.2003 and has further come on record that the t and transportation, where he used expenses towards special diet/tea at ired an artificial limb. The claimant nt and also took treatment at Saket 25.11.2002 and was discharged on ). It is further the case that he spent taking treatment, and the estimated 0,260/- (Ex.P-44). As per disability red 45% permanent disability. At the t 43 years of age and was working as 120/- per day and remained unable Ex.PB/1) was registered promptly.
!
njay mant uate ent, the dical 002, and t the used ea at mant aket d on spent ated bility t the ng as able ptly. !
ANIL KUMAR 2026.04.23 14:46 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document
FAO-1907-20
"
awarded a sum towards pain ₹21,600/- tow income, along the claim pe respondents jo the awarded co a nationalized aforesaid awar preferred by %
& ₹'()* +
2005 (O&M)
#
!
Consequ a sum of ₹4,02,700/- to the claima pain and suffering, ₹27,500/- towar towards pecuniary loss and ₹2,91 along with interest @ 9% per annum m petition till its realization, faste ents jointly and severally.
The Tribun rded compensation, a sum of ₹2,50,000 alized bank for a period of three d award passed by the learned Tribuna the appellant seeking enhancemen
"
# &
"
$ #
onsequently, the learned Tribunal claimant, which included ₹50,000/- towards medication and treatment, ₹2,91,600/- towards future loss of nnum from the date of institution of , fastening the liability upon the Tribunal further directed that out of 50,000/- be kept in a fixed deposit in three years. Aggrieved against the ribunal, the present appeal has been cement of the compensation.
₹$((()* ₹,((()* unal - ent, ss of on of the ut of sit in t the been
ANIL KUMAR 2026.04.23 14:46 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document
FAO-1907-20
" (
consequent lo particularly in on the earning towards future reduction of th further submi suffering, me charges are o contended that the awarded a which ₹1,72,7 the compens circumstances enhancement Reliance is pla in Civil Appe Hussain vs. R decided on 09.
$ -
2005 (O&M)
Learned counsel submits that ent loss of earning capacity have no rly in view of the amputation of the le arning capacity of a daily wager. It i future prospects has been granted, n of the just compensation payable to submits that the amounts awarded u g, medical expenses, special diet, are on the lower side and deserv ed that the direction of the learned Trib rded amount is not justified, and the 1,72,700/- has been released, is grossl mpensation be enhanced to ₹10, tances of the case. On these premis ment of the compensation awarde is placed upon the judgment of the H Appeal No. 481–482 of 2019, titl vs. Regional Manager, U.P. State on 09.12.2022.
$
$
,.
s that the functional disability and ave not been properly appreciated, f the leg, which has a serious impact er. It is also argued that no addition nted, which has resulted in further ble to the appellant. Learned counsel rded under the heads of pain and diet, transportation and attendant deserve enhancement. Additionally ed Tribunal with regard to deposit of d the compensation awarded, out of grossly inadequate. It is prayed that ₹10,00,000/- in the facts and remises, learned counsel prays for warded by the learned Tribunal. the Hon’ble Supreme Court of India 9, titled Mohd.
Sabeer @ Shabir tate Road Transport Corporation, !
$ and ated, pact ition rther unsel and dant nally sit of ut of that and s for unal. India bir ,
ANIL KUMAR 2026.04.23 14:46 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document
FAO-1907-20
" /
5. I have heard record with the
6. The controvers that arises for learned Tribu Section 168 o permanent dis capacity. 7. The appellant on 04.07.2002 ₹1,620/- (amo significantly o under the cate physical tasks activities, whic the absence o Minimum Wa the Minimum Ministry of L 2005 (O&M)
&
"
heard learned counsel for the parties ith their assistance. troversy in the present appeal lies in a es for consideration is whether the c Tribunal satisfies the requirement o 168 of the Motor Vehicles Act,1988 nt disability suffered by the claimant ellant was admittedly working as a Be
7.2002.
The learned Tribunal has ass amounting to approximately ₹54/- ntly on the lower side and lacks a r e category of unskilled labor but is sp tasks such as earthwork, assistance s, which demand peak physical health nce of documentary proof of salary m Wage Notifications issued by the imum Wages Act, 1948. Upon perusa of Labour and Employment prese
,
"
*
#
parties and have gone through the s in a narrow compass. The question r the compensation awarded by the ment of ‘just compensation’ under ct,1988, particularly in view of the imant and its impact on his earning s a Beldar at the time of the accident as assessed the monthly income at - per day), which appears to be ks a rational basis. A 'Beldar' falls ut is specifically engaged in arduous tance in masonry, and construction health. It is a settled position that in salary, the Court must rely on the y the relevant Administration under perusal of the official records of the presented in the Rajya Sabha on , the stion the nder e rning ident e at to be falls uous ction at in the nder f the a on ANIL KUMAR 2026.04.23 14:46 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document
FAO-1907-20 01.08.2002, it the Central sp higher end of calculated at assessed by t minimum sugg subsistence sta period. Accord monthly incom legally sound n
8. While the Med his permanent right leg, this 'physical impa down by the H 1 SCC 343, t equated with t of such physic present case, dependent on loads.
The am a medical con renders him a support in the vs. Ram Avtar 2005 (O&M) 02, it is observed that the minimum w tral sphere ranged from ₹52/- to ₹ nd of this statutory range, i.e., ₹67/- ed at ₹2,010/- (₹67 x 30 days). The by the learned Tribunal is not o m suggested by these official records b nce standards reflected in the Centra Accordingly, this Court finds it just a income of the appellant at ₹2,010/ ound notional income for a Beldar in t e Medical Board, vide Disability Cert anent physical disability at 45% on ac g, this Court cannot remain obliviou l impairment' and 'functional disabilit the Hon’ble Supreme Court in Raj K , the percentage of physical disab with the loss of earning capacity. The physical impairment on the specific vo case, the appellant is a manual l nt on physical agility, balance, and th he amputation of a limb for a person o al condition; it is a catastrophic ec him a 'misfit' in the open labor mark in the observations of the Hon’ble Su vtarTomar, (2012) 2 SCC 551, whe
' mum wages for unskilled workers in ₹67/- per day. By adopting the per day, the monthly income is ). The figure of ₹1,620/- originally not only lower than the statutory cords but even fails to meet the basic Central sphere notifications of that just and appropriate to reassess the ,010/-, treating it as a realistic and ar in the year 2002. y Certificate (Ex.R-46), has assessed on account of the amputation of his blivious to the distinction between isability'. As per the settled law laid aj Kumar vs. Ajay Kumar (2011) l disability cannot be mechanically y. The Court must assess the impact cific vocation of the appellant. In the nual laborer—a job that is 100% and the ability to bear heavy head- erson of the labor class is not merely hic economic blow that effectively market.
This principle finds strong ’ble Supreme Court in Mohan Soni where the Court held: ' rs in the e is nally utory basic that s the and ssed f his ween laid 11) cally pact n the 00% - erely ively trong oni ANIL KUMAR 2026.04.23 14:46 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document
FAO-1907-20 'The los manual assessed physica disabilit doing b significa Further, in Cha Court emphasize injury but a dest even with the strenuous tasks trenches. Given skills for sedent Therefore, appl (supra), this Co body is significa justice, the func capacity to earn and substantially
9. 0
"
1 -3
6 2005 (O&M) e loss of a leg for a person whose on ual labor, such as a cart-puller o essed simply on a medical scale. Su sically disabled but is economi bility prevents him from dischargin ng before the accident, the loss ificantly higher than the physical pe Chanapp Vs. Divisional Manager, phasized that for a driver or a laborer, a destruction of his 'tools of trade.' A h the aid of a prosthetic limb, can tasks such as climbing ladders at Given the Appellant's age (43 years sedentary work, his prospects for futu , applying the principles of Raj Kum is Court finds that the functional disa gnificantly higher than the medical as e functional disability is hereby asses o earn his livelihood in his chosen pro antially eclipsed.
"
($ (4 (( , (4 , (( (, ((
4 e only means of livelihood is ler or a Beldar, cannot be e. Such a person is not just omically crippled.
If the rging the very work he was oss of earning capacity is al percentage.' ger, (2020) 15 SCC 154, the Apex borer, the loss of a limb is not just an de.' A Beldar with an amputated leg, b, cannot be expected to perform rs at construction sites or digging years) and his lack of specialized r future employment are decimated. aj Kumar (supra) and Mohan Soni al disability in respect of the whole ical assessment. To meet the ends of assessed at 70%, as the appellant’s sen profession has been permanently
2 4 ((
# 5
+
4 pex st an leg, form ging lized ated. Soni hole ds of ant’s ently
ANIL KUMAR 2026.04.23 14:46 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document
FAO-1907-20 (( 8
9 :91
"
. ₹,(((()* ₹(()*
₹,((()* 2
₹ (((()* / 1 ₹4',()*.
₹,((()*
10.
The learned T damages is sh compensation" 2005 (O&M) * -3
91:-
;
1 - 91 -$,;
1
₹
*
&
5
<
1
.
* / 0
#
>
/
₹?,()*
1 rned Tribunal’s award of ₹50,000/ s is shockingly low and fails to sat sation". Under the head of Pain and S
?
0 ((
8
7
₹,(((()*
4,(()*
2
=
*
#
>
1
1 -3 5
+ 6
0,000/- under the head of general to satisfy the requirement of "just and Suffering, this Court observes ?
1
neral
"just erves ANIL KUMAR 2026.04.23 14:46 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document
FAO-1907-20 that the physic 'phantom limb enhance the co Loss of Amen walk, run, or le head of dama results in perm and social toll ₹50,000/- und appellant prod but the learned one-time purc Manager (202 replacement a standard wear replacements i of ₹2,00,000/ No. Head of Compensation 1 Loss of Future Earnings 2 Pain and Suffe 3 Loss of Ameni 2005 (O&M) physical agony of losing a limb at th limb' pain is a life-long burden; this the compensation for pain and suffer Amenities and Enjoyment of Life, a n, or lead a normal social life, this Cou damage, hereby awards ₹1,00,000/ n permanent disfigurement which carr ial toll, it would be just and equitabl under this head. Finally, regarding t produced an estimate for an artifici learned Tribunal failed to appreciate e purchase.
As per the law laid dow (2023) 1 SCC 439, an amputee is e ent and maintenance; considering wear-and-tear of prosthetic devices ents in his lifetime, for which this C ,000/-. sation Calculation uture ₹2,512.50 (Inc + 25% x 14 x 70% Suffering For physical trauma surgeries menities For the loss of ability enjoy life
@ b at the age of 43 and the recurring this Court deem it appropriate to suffering to ₹1,50,000/-. Regarding , as the appellant can no longer his Court recognizes this as a distinct ,000/-. Furthermore, as amputation h carries a significant psychological uitable to award a separate sum of rding Future Medical Expenses, the artificial leg at ₹10,260/- (Ex.P-44), eciate that a prosthetic limb is not a id down in Sidram vs. Divisional ee is entitled to the cost of periodic ering the appellant’s age and the evices, he will require at least 3-4 this Courtaward a consolidated sum Amount 25% Prospects) x 12 ₹2,95,470 auma of amputation and ₹1,50,000 ability to walk and ₹1,00,000 @ rring te to rding nger tinct ation gical m of , the 44), not a nal iodic the 4 sum
,470 ,000 ,000 ANIL KUMAR 2026.04.23 14:46 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document
FAO-1907-20 No. Head of Compensation 4 Future Medica Prosthetics 5 Medical Expen (Past) 6 Disfigurement 7 Attendant Cha 8 Special Diet & Nutrition 9 Conveyance 10 Actual Loss of
TOTAL AWA
11. In view of the that the comp wholly inade compensation’ compensation payable by Re
12. The enhanced awarded by th annum from 2005 (O&M) sation Calculation edical / For life-long mainten replacements Expenses Based on proven bills P45) ement For permanent physic social toll Charges For help required dur immobility & For high-protein heal
For taxi costs for 9 PG Saket Hospital of Wages Income lost during 6 recovery @ ₹2,010/p AWARD JUST COMPENSA of the foregoing discussion, this Cour compensation of ₹4,02,700/-awarde inadequate and does not meet sation’. Accordingly, the present a sation is re-determined and enhanced by Respondent No. 3 – the Insurance C anced amount of compensation, i.e., by the learned Tribunal, shall carry i from the date of filing of the claim
( Amount aintenance and ₹2,00,000 bills (Ex. P3 to Ex.
₹50,000 physical change and ₹50,000 during months of ₹30,000 healing post-surgery ₹25,000 PGI visits and ₹15,000 6 months of ,010/pm ₹12,060 NSATION ₹9,27,530 s Court is of the considered opinion warded by the learned Tribunal is meet the requirement of ‘just sent appeal is allowed, and the anced to ₹9,27,530/-, which shall be rance Company. n, i.e., over and above the amount carry interest at the rate of 7.5% per e claim petition till its realization. (
,000 ,530 inion al is ‘just the ll be ount per tion. ANIL KUMAR 2026.04.23 14:46 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document
FAO-1907-20 Consequently, modified to the
13. All pending m as to costs. April, 08, 2026 anil *
2005 (O&M) ently, the impugned award passed b d to the aforesaid extent, and the appea ing miscellaneous applications, if any
(AMAR
Whether speaking/reasoned Whether reportable
ssed by the learned Tribunal stands appeal is accordingly allowed. , if any, stand disposed of. No order MARINDER SINGH GREWAL)
JUDGE
: Yes/No : Yes/No tands
order
ANIL KUMAR 2026.04.23 14:46 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document