IN THE (223) Rajesh Kumar Madan Lal And O CORAM :HON Present: Mr. Mr. Mr. for Mr. for AMARINDER S 1. The seeking enhance Accident Claims Tribunal”) vide along with intere petition till realiz appellant in a m occurred due to t HR-39-0942 by r 2. Brie that the appellan of the Motor V injuries sustained THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB CHANDIGARH Versus And Ors HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AMARIN Mr. Nitin Jain, Advocate, and Mr. Khushan Dutta, Advocate, and Mr. Parv Ahluwalia, Advocate, for the appellant. Mr. Sumit Gupta, Advocate, for respondent No.4-Insurance Com *** DER SINGH GREWAL, J. (ORAL) The present appeal has been filed hancement of the compensation awa laims Tribunal, Narnaul (hereinafter vide award dated 09.01.2001, wher interest @ 12% per annum from the l realization was awarded on account in a motor vehicular accident dated ue to the rash and negligent driving of 2 by respondent No.1. Briefly stated, the facts as emerge fr pellant-claimant Rajesh Kumar filed a tor Vehicles Act, 1988 seeking co stained by him in a motor vehicular a JAB AND HARYANA AT RH FAO-250-2002 (O&M) Date of decision: 02.04.2026 ...Appellant ... Respondents ARINDER SINGH GREWAL , and e Company. RAL) n filed by the claimant-appellant n awarded by the learned Motor inafter referred to as “the learned , whereby a sum of ₹3,50,000/- om the date of filing of the claim count of injuries sustained by the dated 01.08.1999. The accident ing of bus bearing registration No. erge from the impugned award are filed a petition under Section 166 ng compensation on account of ular accident dated 01.08.1999 at SHUBHAM 2026.04.09 12:01 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document/order about 1:40 PM. I on Scooter No. H Haryana Roadw No.1 in a rash a against the scoo dated 02.08.1999 Station Khol. At years, was marrie a service station support of his av deposed that he w basis of his claim evidence on reco thereafter shifted admitted from 0 procedures. The disability certific appellant suffere fractures of right 60% permanent d whole body), re impairment of th appellant has sub documents exhib additional bills p PM. It was pleaded that while he was No. HR-34/6866, being driven on th oadways Bus bearing No. HR-39/0 rash and negligent manner, came on e scooter, resulting in multiple griev 8.1999 under Sections 279/337/338 IP At the time of the accident, the a married and had two dependent childr station and also engaged in agricultu his avocation and income, he steppe at he was earning about Rs. 6,000/- s claim before the learned Tribunal. record that the appellant was initiall shifted to Pushpanjali Hospital, Gu rom 01.08.1999 to 31.08.1999 and u . The medical evidence, including ertificate issued by the competent me suffered preganglionic brachial plexu f right upper limb and femur, and wa nent disability in relation to the right dy), resulting in monoplegia, musc t of the limb. Insofar as the medical e as substantiated his claim by placing exhibited as Ex.P-3 to Ex.P-4 and E bills produced in evidence as Ex.P he was travelling as a pillion rider on the correct side of the road, a 39/0942, driven by respondent me on the wrong side and struck grievous injuries. FIR No. 158 /338 IPC was registered at Police , the appellant was aged about 30 children, was stated to be running ricultural and allied activities. In stepped into the witness box and per month, which formed the unal. It further emerges from the initially taken to PHC Kanina and l, Gurgaon, where he remained and underwent multiple surgical uding testimony of doctors and ent medical board, shows that the plexus injury (right) along with nd was assessed to have suffered e right upper limb (and not to the muscle wasting and functional dical expenses are concerned, the ing on record medical bills and and Ex.P-15 to Ex.P-116, besides Ex.P-148 to Ex.P-153. The said SHUBHAM 2026.04.09 12:01 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document/order unrebutted docu incurred medica treatment. The ev treatment, underw additional expen of the pleadings upon appreciation decided Issue No petition, awardin along with intere petition till realiz respondents. Agg Tribunal, the pre enhancement of t 3. Lear learned Tribunal compensation o commensurate w by the appellant. the accident caus He remains adm underwent surgic limb and right fe that the appellan account of seve documentary evidence clearly esta edical expenditure of approximatel The evidence further indicates that he underwent repeated follow-up visits t expenses towards transportation and a dings of the parties, the learned Tribu ciation of the oral as well as documen No.1 in favour of the claimant warding a sum of Rs. 3,50,000/- to t interest @ 12% per annum from the l realization, fastening the liability joi Aggrieved against the aforesaid aw the present appeal has been preferre nt of the compensation. Learned counsel for the claimant ibunal erred both on facts and in l ion of ₹3,50,000/-, which is wh rate with the nature of injuries and pe ellant. It is argued that the appellant s t caused due to the rash and negligent s admitted in the hospital from 01.0 surgical procedures, including insertio ight femur, as well as fixation with n pellant’s right hand becomes benumb f severe injuries. The appellant con y establishes that the appellant imately ₹2,00,000/- towards his that he remained under prolonged visits to the hospital and incurred and attendant care. On the basis Tribunal framed three issues and, cumentary evidence led on record, ant and partly allowed the claim to the appellant Rajesh Kumar om the date of filing of the claim lity jointly and severally upon the said award passed by the learned referred by the appellant seeking imant-appellant contends that the d in law in awarding a meagre is wholly inadequate and not and permanent disability suffered ellant sustains grievous injuries in ligent driving of respondent No.1. m 01.08.1999 to 31.08.1999 and insertion of rods in his right upper with nails. It is further submitted enumbed and suffers paralysis on nt continues to visit Pushpanjali SHUBHAM 2026.04.09 12:01 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document/order Hospital from hi medical expenses ₹50,000/- spent o recorded before appellant suffers monoplegia of t movement in the scarring over the the learned Tribu expenses incurre appellant. It is als in multiple avoca farm and agricul loss of future e contended that t pain and sufferi impugned award along with intere 4. Per Company conten illegality or perv well as documen substantiate the c the learned Tribu Learned counsel om his native village, Kanina, for foll penses of approximately ₹3,00,000/- spent on further treatment. His evidenc before the learned Tribunal. It is f ers permanent disability to the e a of the right upper limb, accompan in the right knee, muscle wasting o er the right arm, forearm and thigh. L Tribunal fails to properly appreciate incurred on treatment, and the fut It is also argued that the appellant, age avocations, including running a servi gricultural work, earning about ₹6,00 ture earning capacity is not adequ that the compensation awarded unde suffering and loss of amenities, is g award deserves to be modified by e interest and costs. Per contra, learned counsel for contends that the impugned award r perversity and has been passed after cumentary evidence. It is argued that e the claim for enhancement by leadin Tribunal has already granted just an ounsel further submits that the rate for follow-up treatment and incurs -, besides an additional sum of vidence in this regard stands duly It is further contended that the the extent of 60%, resulting in ompanied by pain and restricted ting of the right upper limb, and igh. Learned counsel submits that reciate the medical evidence, the e future medical needs of the nt, aged about 30 years, is engaged a service station, hatchery, poultry ₹6,000/- per month, and that the adequately assessed. It is thus d under various heads, including s, is grossly inadequate, and the by enhancing the compensation l for respondent No.4–Insurance ward does not suffer from any d after due appreciation of oral as ed that the appellant has failed to leading reliable evidence and that just and reasonable compensation. e rate of interest awarded is in SHUBHAM 2026.04.09 12:01 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document/order consonance with maintained that reasoned and do is prayed that the 5. Afte record, the ques whether the com reasonable, or wh of injuries, exten capacity of the cl 6. This record. the disab Dr. B.B. Nagpal who was a mem the appellant wa multiple grievou forearm, fracture with preganglion further reveals developed mono wasting, persiste significant restric permanent disabi right upper limb, permanent in na e with settled law and does not warran that the findings recorded by the nd do not call for any interference by hat the appeal, being devoid of merit, d After hearing learned counsel for t question that arises for consideratio e compensation awarded by the le , or whether the same warrants enhanc , extent of permanent disability and the claimant-appellant. This Court has considered the rival s disability certificate (Ex.P-15), duly agpal, Registrar, Department of Orth member of the duly constituted Med was examined by the Board and w rievous injuries, including fractures acture of right humerus and fracture o anglionic brachial plexus injury (rig veals that on account of the said monoplegia of the right upper limb ersistent pain, scarring over the right a restriction of movements. The Medi disability of the claimant to the exte r limb, and it has been specifically opin in nature and not likely to improve warrant any upward revision. It is y the learned Tribunal are well- ce by this Court. Consequently, it erit, deserves dismissal. l for the parties and perusing the ideration in the present appeal is the learned Tribunal is just and enhancement in light of the nature ty and its impact on the earning rival submissions and perused the , duly proved on record by PW-6 f Orthopaedics, PGIMS, Rohtak, d Medical Board, establishes that and was found to have sustained tures of both bones of the right ture of shaft of right femur, along y (right). The medical evidence said injuries, the appellant has r limb, accompanied by muscle right arm, forearm and thigh, and Medical Board has assessed the e extent of 60% in relation to the ly opined that the said disability is mprove in future, as the electro- SHUBHAM 2026.04.09 12:01 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document/order diagnostic studie However, it is e upper limb and n Hon’ble Supreme the percentage of the percentage of the functional d claimant. In the p station and in a substantial physi regard to the n impairment of th to carry on his affecting the earn of the appellant i running a servic activities. In su running a busine service station o running the said per month prior to the case of th income. Though income tax retur held against the a studies indicated no possibility of reco it is evident that the said assessmen and not to the whole body. In view upreme Court in Raj Kumar v. Ajay tage of permanent disability cannot be tage of loss of earning capacity and th nal disability having regard to the n the present case, the claimant was e in agricultural and allied activities physical labour and effective use of the nature of injuries, the resultan t of the right upper limb, and its impa n his avocation, this Court assesse he earning capacity of the claimant at ellant is concerned, it has come on rec service station and was also involve In support thereof, PW-10 Jainarai usiness of assembling electric monob tion of the appellant, has categoric e said service station and was earning prior to the accident. The said testimo of the claimant-appellant regarding hough no documentary evidence in t returns or salary slips has been pro st the appellant, particularly in the cas f recovery in the brachial plexus. ssment pertains only to the right view of the law laid down by the Ajay Kumar (2011) 1 SCC 343, not be mechanically equated with and the Court is required to assess o the nature of avocation of the was engaged in running a service ivities, which necessarily require use of both upper limbs. Having esultant paralysis and functional s impact on the appellant’s ability assesses the functional disability ant at 60%. Insofar as the income on record that he was engaged in nvolved in agricultural and allied inarain, an independent witness monoblock motors adjacent to the tegorically deposed that he was earning approximately Rs. 5,000/- timony lends due corroboration rding his avocation and source of ce in the form of account books, en produced, the same cannot be he case of a self-employed person SHUBHAM 2026.04.09 12:01 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document/order engaged in sma accounts is not a evidence availab appellant at Rs. 5 7. Inso Court is guided b Sarla Verma v. National Insura Pranay Sethi warranted in the Accordingly, the enhanced by 40% annum. Further, applicable to a p disability affectin future earning is by applying the m 8,56,800/-. 8. The on the basis of (₹97,000/-), Ex.P and Ex.P148 to E Notably, no ad Tribunal or in th amount. Accord n small-scale business activities, wh s not always expected. However, kee vailable on record, this Court assesses t Rs. 5,000/- per month. Insofar as the computation of comp ided by the principles laid down by th a v. Delhi Transport Corporation surance Co. Ltd. v. Pranay Sethi (supra), an addition of 40% to in the case of a self-employed person ly, the monthly income of the appellan by 40% and comes to Rs. 7,000/- per rther, in terms of Sarla Verma (supra to a person aged about 30 years is 1 ffecting the earning capacity of the c ing is assessed at Rs. 50,400/- per ann g the multiplier of 17, the total loss of The Tribunal has computed the med is of documentary evidence placed ), Ex.P4 (₹6,600/-) and other medical 48 to Ex.P153. The said assessment is no additional evidence has been p r in the present appeal to warrant an ccordingly, the medical expenses a s, where maintenance of formal er, keeping in view the nature of ssesses the monthly income of the f compensation is concerned, this by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in ation (2009) 6 SCC 121 and (2017) 16 SCC 680. As per 0% towards future prospects is person below the age of 40 years. pellant, assessed at Rs. 5,000/-, is per month, i.e. Rs. 84,000/- per (supra), the appropriate multiplier s is 17. Considering the functional f the claimant at 60%, the loss of er annum (Rs. 84,000 × 60%), and oss of future earning comes to Rs. e medical expenses at ₹2,00,000/- laced on record, including Ex.P3 edical bills i.e. Ex.P15 to Ex.P16 ent is borne out from the record. een produced either before the rant any modification of the said nses as assessed by the learned SHUBHAM 2026.04.09 12:01 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document/order Tribunal are take under the non- record clearly es resulting in perm monoplegia, mus Such injuries wo and prolonged su Accordingly, a su Further, on acco the claimant has unable to enjoy t The loss of funct impact on his da sum of Rs. 25,00 record also indic and would have hospitalization an of treatment, a su addition, the cla transportation an Though exact d expense, the sam of Rs. 25,000/- having regard t likelihood of c re taken as such. The appellant is furth -pecuniary and incidental heads. arly establishes that the claimant has n permanent disability of the right u a, muscle wasting, restriction of mov ies would have caused considerable p ged suffering during the period of trea ly, a sum of Rs. 1,00,000/- is awarded account of the permanent disability nt has been deprived of leading a no joy the ordinary amenities of life as f functional utility of the right upper lim his day-to-day activities and overall . 25,000/- is awarded towards loss of indicates that the claimant remained have required assistance of an atte tion and recovery. Considering the na nt, a sum of Rs. 25,000/- is awarded to he claimant would have incurred exp ion and frequent visits to the hospit xact documentary proof may not b e same are inevitable in cases of this - is awarded towards special die gard to the nature of injuries, per of continued medical care, phy is further entitled to compensation heads. The medical evidence on nt has suffered grievous injuries ight upper limb, accompanied by f movements and persistent pain. able physical pain, mental trauma of treatment as well as thereafter. arded towards pain and suffering. ability and functional impairment, g a normal and active life and is life as he did prior to the accident. pper limb has a continuing adverse verall quality of life. Therefore, a oss of amenities. The evidence on ained under prolonged treatment n attendant during the period of the nature of injuries and duration rded towards attendant charges. In ed expenses towards special diet, hospital for follow-up treatment. not be available for each such of this nature. Accordingly, a sum ial diet and conveyance. Further, s, permanent disability and the , physiotherapy and follow-up SHUBHAM 2026.04.09 12:01 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document/order treatment, a sum expenses. Accord assessed as under 9. Con appeal is allowe learned Motor A that the compens to ₹13,06,800/- 10. The amount awarded 7.5% per annum realization. 11. All of. No order as to 02.04.2026 Shubham a sum of Rs. 75,000/- is awarde Accordingly, the just compensation pa under: Sr. No. Head of Compensation 1. Loss of future earning capacity 2. Medical expenses 3. Pain and suffering 4. Loss of amenities 5. Attendant charges 6. Special diet & conveyance 7. Future medical expenses Total Consequently, in view of the abo allowed. The impugned award dated otor Accident Claims Tribunal, Narna mpensation payable to the claimant is . The enhanced amount of compensat arded by the learned Tribunal, shall annum from the date of filing of All pending miscellaneous applicat er as to costs. (AMARIN Whether speaking/reasoned Whether reportable warded towards future medical tion payable to the claimant is re- Amount (₹) acity 8,56,800/-. 2,00,000 1,00,000 25,000 25,000 25,000 75,000 ₹13,06,800 e above discussion, the present dated 09.01.2001 passed by the Narnaul, is modified to the extent ant is enhanced from ₹3,50,000/- pensation, i.e., over and above the shall carry interest at the rate of ng of the claim petition till its lications, if any, stand disposed ARINDER SINGH GREWAL) JUDGE ned : Yes/No : Yes/No SHUBHAM 2026.04.09 12:01 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document/order