FAO-1660-2003 IN THE (243)





























Tara Chand Chiranji Lal And CORAM :HON Present: Mr. Ms for t Mr. for r Mr. for r *** AMARINDER S 1. The prese seeking en Accident C learned Tr Rs.1,47,00 account of dated 30.0 2. Briefly sta Tata 407 b as TATA premises. T 003 1 THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB CHANDIGARH




































































































Versus And others HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AMARIN Mr. Pranav Arora, Advocate, for Ms. Shaveta Sanghi, Advocate, for the appellant. Mr. R.C Gupta, Advocate, for respondent No.4 /National Insura Mr. R.C. Kapoor, Advocate, for respondent No. 7 /United India *** DER SINGH GREWAL, J. present appeal has been preferred ing enhancement of compensation aw ident Claims Tribunal, Narnaul (here ed Tribunal”), vide award dated 07.1 ,47,000/- along with interest @ 9% unt of injuries sustained by him in 30.04.1999. fly stated, the claimant was travelling 407 bearing registration No. HR-46/1 ATA 407) along with his brothers, ises. The said vehicle was being driv JAB AND HARYANA AT RH

























 








 
   



  






  
...Appellant ... Respondents ARINDER SINGH GREWAL Insurance Company. India Insurance Company. ferred by the claimant–appellant ion awarded by the learned Motor l (hereinafter referred to as “the 07.12.2002, whereby a sum of 9% per annumwas granted on im in a motor vehicular accident velling from Ateli to Narnaul in a 46/1648 (hereinafter mentioned thers, after closing their business g driven at a moderate speed and ANIL KUMAR 2026.05.11 17:12 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document FAO-1660-2003 on the corr When the registration as Chiranji a rash and result of claimant T taken to C the claima driving of No.5, both occurrence compensat 3. Upon noti petition. R and contes proceeded the necess documenta awarded a The liabili and severa impugned of compen 003 2 he correct side of the road by respond n the vehicle reached near Tajpur stration No. HRM-3697, being driven hiranjilal, came from the opposite dire sh and negligent manner and struck t of which the vehicle overturned. ant Tarachand sustained multiple in n to Civil Hospital, Narnaul for treatm claimant that the accident occurred du ing of the offending vehicles by respo , both of whom are alleged to be rrence. Hence, the present claim p pensation under the Motor Vehicles A n notice, the respondents appeared ion. Respondent Nos. 1, 2, 4 and 7 fi contested the matter, whereas respon eeded against Ex-Parte. Thereafter, t necessary issues and, upon appreciat mentary evidence on record, partly all rded a sum of ₹1,47,000/- along with liability to pay the awarded compen severally upon respondent Nos. 1, 2 ugned award, the appellant has filed t ompensation. spondent no.5 named as Satyapal. Tajpur turning, a truck bearing driven by respondent No.1 named ite direction at a high speed and in struck against the Tata 407, as a urned. In the said accident, the iple injuries and was immediately treatment. It is the specific case of rred due to the rash and negligent respondent No.1 and respondent to be equally responsible for the laim petition was filed seeking cles Act, 1988. peared and contested the claim nd 7 filed their written statements respondent Nos. 3, 5 and 6 were fter, the learned Tribunal framed preciation of the oral as well as rtly allowed the claim petition and g with interest @ 9% per annum. pensation was fastened jointly . 1, 2 and 4. Dissatisfied with the filed this appeal for enhancement ANIL KUMAR 2026.05.11 17:12 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document FAO-1660-2003 4. Learned co of the acc from Ateli reached n respondent the opposi overturn, appellant. Tribunal, respondent negligence on neglige the compe insufficien further su Narnaul, f vide MLR was remo remained Gautam H Dr.Rajinde Dr.Mukesh Raj Hospi and jaws. H he had em 003 3 ned counsel for the appellant-claiman he accident, the appellant and his tw Ateli to Narnaul in a Tata-407 (No hed near Village Tajpur, a truck (N ondent No. 1 in a rash and negligent m opposite side. Furthermore, this collis turn, resulting in serious injuries t llant. In addition to this, it was em unal, through its award dated ondent No. 1 responsible for the accid igence in favor of the appellant. Cons egligence was correct, the appellant h compensation of Rs. 1,47,000/- awarde cient and needs to be increased and er submitted that the appellant wa aul, from the place of occurrence an MLR PW1/C. Thereafter, keeping in removed to Sawai Man Singh H ained admitted for a long period. He tam Hospital, Joshi Hospital, Parma ajinderNarula’s Hospital, Dr. Bajaj ukeshGoel, Hospital of Dr.Rathi, Ho Hospital and of Dr.Ansuya. He was jaws. He spent about Rs. 1,00,000/- on ad employed an attendant @ Rs.1,00 laimant contended that on the day his two brothers were travelling 7 (No. HR-46-1648). When they uck (No. HRM-3697) driven by gent manner hit their vehicle from collision caused the Tata-407 to ries to all occupants including emphasized that the learned ted 07.12.2002, correctly held accident and decided the issue of Consequently, while the finding llant has filed this appeal because awarded by thelearned Tribunal is d and warrants enhancement. It is nt was taken to Civil Hospital, nce and medico-legally examined ing in view his serious injuries, he ngh Hospital, Jaipur, where he d. He also received treatment at Parmar Hospital, Saini Hospital, Bajaj Clinic, Eye Hospital of thi, Hospital of Dr. Vijay Yadav, e was operated upon for his nose on his treatment. Besides that, s.1,000/- per month to look after ANIL KUMAR 2026.05.11 17:12 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document FAO-1660-2003 him. The a left mendi He develo expenditur etc. That Rs.1,47,00 awarded R telephone account of of pain and of income employme heads was spent by permanent multiple fr loss of inc and the interest, so 5. Per contra Company) contended or perversi as docume failed to s 003 4 . The appellant proved on record that th mendile and zygena and was operate developed disability to the extent of 1 nditure, he has produced on record t That the learned Tribunal has ,47,000/-, which is highly on lower rded Rs.4,203/- on account of medic hone charges and special diet; Rs. unt of permanent disability; Rs.50,000 ain and suffering and Rs.15,000/- were income. However, no amount was loyment of attendant. That the amo s was not sufficient and adequate k t by the appellant on his treatment anent disability suffered by him, the tiple fractures and treatment received of income. Therefore, it was prayed compensation be increased to est, so that the appellant gets the actua contra, learned counsel for respondent pany) and respondent No. 7 (United ended that the impugned award does n erversity and has been passed after due ocumentary evidence. It was submi d to substantiate the claim for enhan that there was fracture of maxilla, perated upon for the said injuries. nt of 10%. That in support of his cord the available bills, vouchers has awarded only a sum of lower side. The learned Tribunal medical bills, transport charges, t; Rs.40,000/- were awarded on 50,000/- were awarded on account were awarded on account of loss t was awarded on account of amount awarded under various uate keeping in view the amount atment under various heads, the im, the pain and suffering due to eived for a longer period and the rayed that the appeal be allowed ed to Rs.6,00,000/- along with e actual relief he deserves. ondent No. 4 (National Insurance nited India Insurance Company) does not suffer from any illegality ter due appreciation of oral as well submitted that the appellant has enhancement by leading reliable ANIL KUMAR 2026.05.11 17:12 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document FAO-1660-2003 evidence. Tribunal a Court. Co merit, dese 6. Having co perusal of the parties award date conform to compensat 7. At the out Tribunal o Court and, stands dul PW2/A) an accident in of the offe arises for compensat for enhanc 8. From the m had suffere (upper jaw injuries ar forming th 003 5 ence. It is maintained that the findin unal are well-reasoned and do not call rt. Consequently, it is prayed that th it, deserves dismissal. ing considered the rival submission sal of the record, with the able assist parties, this Court is of the consider rd dated 07.12.2002, passed by learn orm to the settled principles of law g pensation to the appellant-claimant. he outset, it is noticed that the findi unal on the issue of negligence has n rt and, thus, has attained finality. Even ds duly substantiated from the reco /A) and the copy of challan (Ex. PW dent in question occurred on account o he offending truck by respondent No s for consideration in the presen pensation awarded to the appellant is nhancement. the material available on record, it suffered multiple grievous injuries, in er jaw), mandible (lower jaw) and z ries are not superficial in nature but ing the structure of the face, thereby findings recorded by the learned ot call for any interference by this that the appeal, being devoid of issions and upon a meticulous assistance of learned counsel for nsidered view that the impugned learned Tribunal, does not fully law governing just and equitable finding recorded by the learned has not been assailed before this . Even otherwise, the said finding e record. The copy of FIR (Ex. x. PW1) clearly establish that the ount of rash and negligent driving nt No.1. The only question that present appeal is whether the lant is just and reasonable or calls rd, it is evident that the appellant ies, including fractures of maxilla and zygoma (cheek bone). Such re but relate to vital facial bones ereby affecting essential functions ANIL KUMAR 2026.05.11 17:12 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document FAO-1660-2003 like chew reveals tha said injurie fixation t immobiliza speaking a affects the complicati that the ap the period recovery w prolonged treatment w is clear th mandible a 01.05.1999 9. Regarding original d permanent appellant d his exact m the absenc estimate th severe, the disability h 003 6 chewing, speaking and facial sym als that the appellant had to undergo injuries. Fractures of the maxilla and tion through surgical procedures, obilization of the jaw, causing consi king and day-to-day activities. Simila the cheek structure and may lead t plications relating to vision or facial m the appellant must have undergone sev period of treatment. The nature of inj very would not have been immediat onged medical care, restricted diet ment which is proved from the record lear that the petitioner was having dible and zygoma and remained admit 99 to 07.05.1999 . arding the compensation for disabili inal disability certificate (Ex. PW anent impact of these injuries. How llant did not place on record any docu xact monthly income at the time of th absence of such vital records, the lear ate the compensation. Building upon re, the learned Tribunal awarded a s bility head. However, the record is s l symmetry. The record further dergo surgical intervention for the la and mandible generally require dures, resulting in prolonged considerable difficulty in eating, Similarly, fracture of the zygoma lead to facial deformity, pain and cial movement. It is, thus, evident one severe pain and trauma during of injuries also indicates that the ediate and would have required diet and continuous follow-up record of SMS Hospital, Jaipur, it ing fractures of maxilla, left admitted in the said hospital from isability, the record includes the . PW4/6), which confirms the However, it is noted that the y documentary evidence regarding e of the accident. Consequently, in he learned Tribunal was forced to upon this, while the injuries were ed a sum of Rs. 40,000/- on the d is silent regarding the monthly ANIL KUMAR 2026.05.11 17:12 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document FAO-1660-2003 income of these vital v. Ajay K Consequen assessmen quality of of ₹40,000 balanced a portion of permanent 10. The appel course of t and cash m P2–P3 (tw twice), E Ex. P94 expenditur claimant h P107–P1 (₹10,250/ bills (milk ₹2,190/- said mater heads of However, 003 7 me of the appellant at the time of the e vital parameters, the structured formu ay Kumar (2011) 1 SCC 343 sequently, the learned Tribunal w ssment based on the nature of the inj ity of life. Considering the accident o 40,000/- under the head of disability i nced assessment. This Court finds no ion of the award, as it provides anent impact of the injuries in the abs appellant has duly proved the expe se of treatment through documentary cash memos pertaining to purchase of P3 (twice), Ex. P9–P16, Ex. P24–P4 e), Ex. P62–P71 (Ex. P64 twice), Ex. P94 and Ex. P130–P139 (Ex. P1 nditure of ₹13,847.42/- towards m ant has proved travel tickets Ex. P5 P129 (₹1,678/-), vehicle receipts Ex ,250/-), telephone bills Ex. P46–P49 (milk and juice) Ex. P140–P148 and E respectively). The learned Tribun material, has awarded a consolidated s of medical, transport, telephone ever, upon re-appraisal of the entire of the accident. In the absence of formula laid down in Raj Kumar cannot be strictly applied. nal was required to make an the injuries and the impact on the ident occurred in 1999, the award bility is found to be a realistic and ds no reason to interfere with this ides fair compensation for the he absence of financial proof. expenditure incurred during the ntary evidence. The medical bills ase of medicines, exhibited as Ex. P45, Ex. P50–P59 (Ex. P57 ), Ex. P74–P80, Ex. P89, Ex. P93, x. P131 twice), substantiate an rds medicines. In addition, the Ex. P5–P8, Ex. P17–P23 and Ex. Ex. P139 and Ex. P141–P146 P49 (₹41.30), and special diet 8 and Ex. P60–P61 (₹12,023/- and Tribunal, upon appreciation of the idated sum of ₹42,030/- under the hone and special diet expenses. entire record, this Court finds that ANIL KUMAR 2026.05.11 17:12 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document FAO-1660-2003 the said a actually s demonstra 01.05.1999 treatment, requiremen nature, can settled tha Act, 1988, confined Abhimany Hon’ble attendant compensat view the n effect of th reassess th held entit towards at towards tr treatment, ensuring a arising from 11. The learne and suffer 003 8 said amount does not adequately re ally suffered by the appellant. onstrates that the appellant rem 5.1999 to 07.05.1999 and thereaf ment, which necessarily entailed rep irements and incidental expenses, ma re, cannot be strictly supported by do ed that compensation under Section 1988, is required to be just, fair and ined to the exact amount of bills anyu Partap Singh v. Namita Sek ’ble Supreme Court has recognize dant care and future treatment ar pensation in cases involving prolong the nature of injuries, duration of tr of the documentary evidence, this C sess the pecuniary compensation. Ac entitled to ₹30,000/- towards me rds attendant charges, ₹10,000/- tow rds transportation, ₹15,000/- towar ment, and ₹10,000/- towards future ring a fair and reasonable recompe ng from the accident. learned Tribunal has awarded a sum suffering which, in the facts and cir tely reflect the pecuniary losses lant. The evidence on record t remained hospitalized from hereafter continued to undergo ed repeated visits, special dietary es, many of which, by their very by documentary proof. It is well ction 166 of the Motor Vehicles air and reasonable, and cannot be f bills produced on record. In Sekhon (2022) 8 SCC 489, the ognized that expenses towards ent are integral components of rolonged incapacity. Keeping in n of treatment and the cumulative this Court deems it appropriate to on. Accordingly, the appellant is ds medical expenses, ₹10,000/- towards special diet, ₹10,000/- towards loss of income during future medical expenses, thereby compense for the losses directly a sum of ₹50,000/- towards pain nd circumstances of the case, is ANIL KUMAR 2026.05.11 17:12 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document FAO-1660-2003 found to b it is well pecuniary quality of Co. Ltd. that such l nature and injuries, pr of₹10,000 compensat 12. In view of compensat enhanced t of ₹38,000 payment, a 13. The enhan amount aw of 7.5% pe realization 14. All pendin May,06, 2026 Anil 003 9 d to be just and reasonable and is acco well settled that compensation m niary losses such as loss of ameni ity of life. In Sri Benson George v. R Ltd., (2022) 13 SCC 142, the Hon’b such losses cannot be assessed mecha re and extent of suffering. Consideri ries, prolonged treatment and consequ 0,000/- is awarded towards loss of pensation shall, accordingly, stand rev iew of the foregoing discussion, the pr pensation awarded by the learned nced to ₹1,85,000/-, thereby resulting 8,000/-. All other terms and conditi ent, and apportionment, shall remain enhanced amount of compensation unt awarded by the learned Tribunal, s .5% per annum from the date of filing zation. pending miscellaneous applications, if (AMARIN Whether speaking/reasoned : Whether reportable : is accordingly affirmed. However, tion must also encompass non- amenities and diminution in the e v. Reliance General Insurance Hon’ble Supreme Court has held mechanically and must reflect the sidering the appellant’s grievous onsequent hardship, a further sum ss of amenities of life. The total nd revised. the present appeal is allowed. The rned Tribunal at ₹1,47,000/- is sulting in a marginal enhancement conditions of the award, mode of emain unaltered. sation, i.e., over and above the unal, shall carry interest at the rate f filing of the claim petition till its ons, if any, stand disposed of. ARINDER SINGH GREWAL) JUDGE ned : Yes/No : Yes/No ANIL KUMAR 2026.05.11 17:12 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document FAO-1660-2003

003 10 ANIL KUMAR 2026.05.11 17:12 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document