FAO No.1658 of 2005 (O&M) with FAO No.1659 of 2005 (O&M) with FAO No.5565 of 2005 (O&M) with FAO No.5566 of 2005 (O&M) -1- S. No.260 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH **** Date of Decision:23.07.2026 1. FAO No.1658 of 2005 (O&M) Bindu Rani .....Appellant Vs. Rajinder Singh and others .....Respondents 2. FAO No.1659 of 2005 (O&M) Rishi Pal .....Appellant Vs. Rajinder Singh and others .....Respondents 3. FAO No.5565 of 2005 (O&M) Bindu Rani .....Appellant Vs. Rajinder Singh and others .....Respondents 3. FAO No.5566 of 2005 (O&M) Rishi Pal .....Appellant Vs. Rajinder Singh and others .....Respondents CORAM:- HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE YASHVIR SINGH RATHOR Present:- Ms. Shikha, Advocate for Mr. Rahul Deswal, Advocate for the appellants. Respondent No.1 and 1-B ex parte before Tribunal. Mr. Aseem Aggarwal, Advocate for respondent- NIC – Respondent No.4. Mr. Taranjit Singh, Advocate for RENU 2026.07.28 17:04 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document Chandigarh FAO No.1658 of 2005 (O&M) with FAO No.1659 of 2005 (O&M) with FAO No.5565 of 2005 (O&M) with FAO No.5566 of 2005 (O&M) -2- Mr. Gaurav Sethi, Advocate for respondent No.2 in FAO No.5565 of 2005. Mr. Jai Bhagwan, Advocate for respondent No.3 in FAO-5565, 5566 of 2005 and for respondent No.1(b) in FAO-1658 and 1659 of 2005. **** Yashvir Singh Rathor, J. (Oral) IOIN FAO No.1659 of 2005 Copy of award has been supplied. IOIN stands disposed of. The main cases are taken up on Board today itself. FAO No.1658 of 2005 (O&M) and connected cases 1. Initially two appeals i.e. FAO Nos.1658 and 1659 of 2005 were instituted. Subsequently, same claimants – appellant instituted FAO Nos.5565 and 5566 of 2005 against the same award and since two set of appeals have been filed, the appeals earlier instituted shall be entertained and the appeals bearing FAO No.5565 and 5566 of 2005 are ordered to be dismissed. 2. These appeals i.e. FAO Nos.1658 and 1659 of 2005 have been instituted by the claimants against the Award dated 21.12.2004 passed by MACT, Ambala (for short “Tribunal”) for enhancement of compensation awarded in MACT Cases No.41 and 45 of 2002 in the petitions under Section 166 of Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 (for short, `Act’) vide which sums of Rs57,250/- and Rs.60,800/- have been awarded as compensation to Bindu Rani and Rishi Pal -claimants/appellants respectively along with interest at the rate of 6% per annum RENU 2026.07.28 17:04 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document Chandigarh FAO No.1658 of 2005 (O&M) with FAO No.1659 of 2005 (O&M) with FAO No.5565 of 2005 (O&M) with FAO No.5566 of 2005 (O&M) -3- due to injuries suffered by them in a motor vehicular accident on account of rash and negligent driving by respondent No.1 while driving offending vehicle/Maruti Car No.HYJ-8671 (for short ‘offending vehicle’), which was insured with respondent- Insurance Company 3. From the pleadings of parties, following issues were framed by the learned Tribunal:- 1. Whether Bindu Rani & Rishi Pal injured received multiple & grievous injuries in this accident allegedly caused due to rash & negligent driving of Maruti Car bearing registration No.HYJ-8671 by respondent No.1? ...OPP 2. If issue No.1 is proved in affirmative then to what amount of compensation, the claimants of both claim petitions are entitled to and from whom? ...OPP 3. Whether the claim petition is bad from mis-joinder & non- joinder of necessary parties? ...OPR-3. 4. Whether resp. No.1-A Baljit Singh was owner of the vehicle resp. No.1 was not holding valid effective driving licence at the time of alleged accident? OPR 5. Whether resp. No.1 was not holding valid a effective driving licence at the time of alleged accident? ...OPR 6. Relief. 4. Thereafter, the parties led evidence in support of their case. RENU 2026.07.28 17:04 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document Chandigarh FAO No.1658 of 2005 (O&M) with FAO No.1659 of 2005 (O&M) with FAO No.5565 of 2005 (O&M) with FAO No.5566 of 2005 (O&M) -4- 5. After hearing the parties and going through the material on the file, a sum of Rs.57,250/- and Rs.60,800/- have been awarded as compensation to Bindu Rani and Rishi Pal -claimants/appellants along with interest at the rate of 6% per annum from the date of filing of claim petition till realization. 6. Feeling aggrieved, the appeals in hand have been preferred by claimant. The material on file has been perused and parties have been heard. 7. The only issue required to be determined in the present appeals relates to the assessment of compensation. Therefore, the entire facts regarding the manner of the accident are not required to be reproduced in detail, as the Tribunal has already held under issue No.1 that the accident in question had taken place due to the rash and negligent driving on the part of respondent No.1, who was driver of the offending vehicle and the vehicle was insured with respondent – Insurance Company. No appeal or cross-objections have been filed by respondents No.1 and 2, challenging the said finding and accordingly, finding on issue No.1 is not required to be interfered with and the same is affirmed. 8. Learned counsel for the appellants argued that the Tribunal has not appreciated the facts of the case and evidence on file in the correct perspective while assessing the compensation which is grossly inadequate. The compensation has not been awarded for the pecuniary and non-pecuniary damages as per settled law and the compensation awarded vide impugned award is thus liable to be enhanced. 9. On the other hand, learned counsel for respondents argued that the award in question is well reasoned and justified. The material on file has been RENU 2026.07.28 17:04 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document Chandigarh FAO No.1658 of 2005 (O&M) with FAO No.1659 of 2005 (O&M) with FAO No.5565 of 2005 (O&M) with FAO No.5566 of 2005 (O&M) -5- appreciated in the correct perspective while assessing the compensation and no interference in the same is thus called for. C ompensation in FAO No.1658 of 2005 “Bindu Rani Vs. Rajinder Singh and others”:- 10. Case of claimant- Bindu Rani is that she had suffered multiple injuries including fractures in the accident in question. She had spent about Rs.50,000/- to Rs.60,000/- on her treatment and has become disabled. 11. Claimant – Bindu Rani while appearing as PW1 deposed that she had suffered multiple injuries including fractures in the accident. She suffered fracture of right leg below knee and was treated at Sarwal Hospital where she was operated upon for the fracture. PW- Dr. Ashok Sarwal stated that claimant Bindu Rani was admitted in his hospital with fractures of right tibia. She was operated upon by way of interlocking nailing of right tibia and he tendered in evidence the discharge card Ex.P3. 12. PW6 – Dr. P.K. Nigam was one of the members of the Board of doctors who assessed the permanent disability suffered by the claimant and he deposed that as per disability certificate Ex.P4, claimant Bindu Rani has suffered permanent disability to the extent of 15%. She is an old healed operated case of interlocking nail tibia and she has partial stiffness of right knee and ankle joint and permanent physical disability of 15% is in relation to the whole body. 13. In addition to it, claimant has to engage two maids at a salary of Rs.500/- per month to do the household work when she remained bed ridden as her husband had also suffered injuries in the same accident and he was also bed RENU 2026.07.28 17:04 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document Chandigarh FAO No.1658 of 2005 (O&M) with FAO No.1659 of 2005 (O&M) with FAO No.5565 of 2005 (O&M) with FAO No.5566 of 2005 (O&M) -6- ridden. Learned Tribunal after assessing the evidence on file awarded her a sum of Rs.57,250/- as compensation under following heads:- 1. Pain and Suffering Rs.5,000/- 2. Permanent Disability Rs.30,000/- 3. For engaging an Attendant Rs.2,000/- 4. On Special Diet Rs.2,500/- 5. Transportation Rs.750/- 6. Loss of Income during treatment Rs.2,000/- 7. Expenses on treatment Rs.15,000/- _______________ Total Rs.57,250/- ________________ 14. However, the compensation awarded by the Tribunal is grossly inadequate. 15. The law is well settled that the compensation to be awarded for injuries suffered by victim in a motor vehicular accident should be just and equitable. Courts have consistently held that while money cannot erase the pain, suffering, or trauma but it is the only legal means to provide restitution and restore the victim to his previous position as far as possible for which ‘just compensation’ has to be assessed. It is also well settled that while it is impossible to fully compensate for the loss of limb, life, or quality of life, the compensation must be RENU 2026.07.28 17:04 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document Chandigarh FAO No.1658 of 2005 (O&M) with FAO No.1659 of 2005 (O&M) with FAO No.5565 of 2005 (O&M) with FAO No.5566 of 2005 (O&M) -7- ‘Just’, meaning thereby, that it should be fair, reasonable, and equitable based on the evidence and not merely a ‘Windfall’ or a ‘Pittance’. The core objective is to put the injured/victim in the same position he would have been if the accident had not taken place, to the extent money can do so. This approach ensures that the law provides a realistic recompense for the trauma endured, rather than just providing normal relief. 16. Hon'ble Supreme Court in 2013 (3) RCR (Civil) 934 - G.Ravindranath @ R. Chowdary Vs. E. Srinivas and another, has held that in a case of accident resulting in injuries to the victim, the compensation in personal injury cases should be determined under the following heads:- Pecuniary damages (Special damages) (i) Expenses relating to treatment, hospitalization, medicines, transportation, nourishing expenditure. food and miscellaneous (ii) Loss of earnings (and other gains) which the injured would have made had he not been injured, comprising: (a) Loss of earning during the period of treatment; (b) Loss of future earnings on account of permanent disability (iii) Future medical expenses. Non-pecuniary damages (General damages) (iv) Damages for pain, suffering and trauma as a consequence of the injuries. (v) Loss of amenities (and/or loss of prospects of marriage). (vi) Loss of expectation of life (shortening of normal longevity). RENU 2026.07.28 17:04 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document Chandigarh FAO No.1658 of 2005 (O&M) with FAO No.1659 of 2005 (O&M) with FAO No.5565 of 2005 (O&M) with FAO No.5566 of 2005 (O&M) -8- In routine personal injury cases, compensation will be awarded under heads (i), (ii) (a) and (iv) It is only in serious cases of injury, where there is specific medical evidence corroborating the evidence of the claimant that compensation will be granted under any of the heads (ii) (b), (iii), (v) and (vi) relating to loss of future earnings on account of permanent disability, future medical expenses, loss of amenities (and/or loss of prospects of marriage) and loss of expectation of life. 17. Injured was a housewife. However, the Tribunal has assessed her notional income to be Rs.1,000/- per month only but the approach of the Tribunal is highly erroneous. This Court cannot lose sight of the fact that deceased must have been rendering gratuitous services to the family being the wife and mother and she thus has to be treated as a home-maker. Hon’ble Supreme Court in AIR 2021 (SC) 353, titled Kirti Vs. Oriental Insurance Co. Ltd. has held that the income of a home-maker should at least be assessed by adopting the lowest minimum wages applicable for unskilled workers. Future prospects too have to be applied, while assessing the monthly income. The accident had taken place on 6.1.2002 and during those days, even the labourers used to earn around Rs.3,500/- per month which were the minimum wages and accordingly, the income of deceased is taken as Rs.3,500/- per month. 18. Injured was 30 years of age and as such, 40% amount has to be added to the monthly income of the deceased towards future prospects in view of law laid down in Sarla Verma’s case (supra) and Pranay Sethi’s case (supra),which takes her income to Rs.4,900/- per month (Rs.3,500/- + Rs.1,400/-). RENU 2026.07.28 17:04 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document Chandigarh FAO No.1658 of 2005 (O&M) with FAO No.1659 of 2005 (O&M) with FAO No.5565 of 2005 (O&M) with FAO No.5566 of 2005 (O&M) -9- 19. The claimant has suffered 15% disability due to fracture in her right tibia and she was operated upon by way of interlocking nailing of right tibia and such a disability shall certainly diminish her earning capability as she will not be able to do her job or routine work and lead her life in the same manner as she was leading prior to the accident. The compensation under the head ‘loss of income’ thus has to be assessed keeping in view the percentage by which her earning capability has been diminished and by applying a suitable multiplier in view of law laid down by Hon'ble Supreme Court in 2010(4) PLR 242 - Yadava Kumar Vs. The Divisional Manager, National Insurance Company Limited. 20. Claimant has suffered permanent disability to the extent of 15% and the monthly loss of income will thus come to Rs.735/- (Rs.4,900/- X .15) and ‘annual loss of income’ will come out to Rs.8,820/- per annum (i.e. Rs.735/- X 12). 21. The claimant was 30 years of age and in view of law laid down in Pranay Sethi’s case (supra), the multiplier of 17 has to be applied which takes the compensation to Rs.1,49,940/- (Rs.8,820/- X 17) on account of ‘loss of in- come’ due to permanent disability. 22. It has come in evidence that claimant had suffered fracture in her right tibia and she was operated upon by way of interlocking nailing of right tibia. It must have taken at least three months for the injuries to heal and it is a matter of common knowledge that pain component in such injuries is enormous and taking RENU 2026.07.28 17:04 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document Chandigarh FAO No.1658 of 2005 (O&M) with FAO No.1659 of 2005 (O&M) with FAO No.5565 of 2005 (O&M) with FAO No.5566 of 2005 (O&M) -10- into consideration the severity of injuries, she is held entitled to a sum of Rs.20,000/- on account of pain and sufferings. 23. The claimant has been awarded a sum of Rs.15,000/- on account of `expenses incurred on treatment’ as per the medical bills produced on file and no interference in the same is called for. 24. It must have taken three months for the injuries to heal during which period, claimant would have remained bed ridden and would not have been able to do any work and she is accordingly held entitled to a sum of Rs.10,000/- on account of ‘loss of income during the period of treatment’. 25. However, the claimant remained under treatment for a long period. It must have taken at least three months for the injuries to heal and during this pe- riod, she must have spent some amount on transportation as well as on special diet and she is accordingly held entitled to a sum of Rs.5,000/- on account of engag- ing an attendant, Rs.5,000/- on special diet and Rs.2,500/- for transportation. 26. The claimant has suffered 15% of disability on account of fracture in her right tibia and she was operated upon by way of interlocking nailing of right tibia which will impact her day to day activities. Accordingly, the claimant is held entitled to a sum of Rs.10,000/- on account of ‘loss of amenities’. 27. Resultantly, the compensation to be paid to claimant- Bindu Rani is assessed as under:- Sr. No. Head of Compensation Amount Assessed by this Court (₹) 2. Loss of income due to permanent Rs.1,49,940/- RENU 2026.07.28 17:04 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document Chandigarh FAO No.1658 of 2005 (O&M) with FAO No.1659 of 2005 (O&M) with FAO No.5565 of 2005 (O&M) with FAO No.5566 of 2005 (O&M) -11- disability Pain and Sufferings Rs.20,000/- Expenses incurred on treatment Rs.15,000/- Loss of income during period of treatment Rs.10,000/- For engaging an attendant, on special diet and on transporation (composite) Rs.12,500/- Loss of Amenities Rs.10,000/- Total Amount Rs.2,17,440/- Interest 9% 28. As a result of afore-said discussion, the present appeal is partly allowed with costs and the claimant is held entitled to enhanced compensation of Rs.1,60,190/- (Rs.2,17,440/- - Rs.57,250/-) along with interest @ 9% per annum, from the date of filing of claim petition i.e. 13.3.2002, till realization. The liability to pay the enhanced compensation shall be in the same terms as ordered by the Tribunal and after making the payment of the enhanced compensation, Insurance Company shall be at liberty to recover the same from respondent No.1- Rajinder Singh along with interest @6% per annum from the date of deposit till realisation without filing separate suit. C ompensation in FAO No.1659 of 2005 (O&M) “Rishi Pal Vs. Rajinder Singh and others”:- 29. Case of claimant- Rishi Pal is that he is medical practitioner and was running a clinic. He was enjoying robust health at the time of accident. He had suffered multiple injuries including fractures in the accident in question. She had spent about Rs.50,000/- to Rs.60,000/- on his treatment and has become disabled. RENU 2026.07.28 17:04 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document Chandigarh FAO No.1658 of 2005 (O&M) with FAO No.1659 of 2005 (O&M) with FAO No.5565 of 2005 (O&M) with FAO No.5566 of 2005 (O&M) -12- 30. As per version of claimant – Rishi Pal, he had suffered fracture in his right leg and he was operated upon in the hospital of Dr. Ashok Sarwal where a rod was inserted in his leg. PW- Dr. Ashok Sarwal deposed that claimant – Rishi Pal had suffered double fracture of left tibia and he had performed surgery for the fractures by interlocking and nailing for uniting the tibia bone and he tendered the discharge card Ex.P2. 31. Dr. P.K. Nigam – PW6 deposed that claimant- Rishi Pal was an old healed operated case of interlocking nail tibia and was having partial stiffness with left knee and left ankle joint and he has suffered permanent disability to the extent of 15% in relation to whole of his body. 32. Learned Tribunal after assessing the evidence on file awarded him a sum of Rs.60,800/- under following heads:- 1. Pain and Suffering Rs.5,000/- 2. Permanent Disability Rs.30,000/- 3. For engaging an Attendant Rs.2,000/- 4. On Special Diet Rs.2,500/- 5. Transportation Rs.1,500/- 6. Loss of Income during treatment Rs.4,800/- for a period of two months 7. Expenses on treatment Rs.15,000/- _______________ Total Rs.60,800/- RENU 2026.07.28 17:04 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document Chandigarh FAO No.1658 of 2005 (O&M) with FAO No.1659 of 2005 (O&M) with FAO No.5565 of 2005 (O&M) with FAO No.5566 of 2005 (O&M) -13- ________________ 33. However, the compensation awarded by the Tribunal is grossly inadequate. 34. The testimony of claimant that the deceased was working as a Medical Practitioner and running a clinic has gone uncontroverted and as such, it has to be believed that deceased used to work as a Medical Practitioner. The accident had taken place on 6.1.2002 and some amount of guess work thus has to be applied while assessing the monthly income. The deceased was a Medical Practitioner and running a clinic and in such cases, the Court is required to ensure just compensation based on preponderance of probabilities. Where the deceased is working in unorganized sector, strict proof of income is not mandatory and notional income can be reasonably assessed based on the social status and facts and circumstances of the case. 35. The Tribunal has considered his monthly notional income to be Rs.2,400/- per month by treating him to be a casual labourer but as per version of claimant he was running a clinic and earning Rs.7,000/- to Rs.8,000/- per month but no cogent and convincing evidence has been led to prove the income and some amount of guess work has to be applied while assessing his income. Accordingly, income of deceased is taken as Rs.3,500/- per month. 36. Injured was 33 years of age and as such, 40% amount has to be added to the monthly income of the deceased towards future prospects in view of law laid down in Sarla Verma’s case (supra) and Pranay Sethi’s case RENU 2026.07.28 17:04 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document Chandigarh FAO No.1658 of 2005 (O&M) with FAO No.1659 of 2005 (O&M) with FAO No.5565 of 2005 (O&M) with FAO No.5566 of 2005 (O&M) -14- (supra),which takes her income to Rs.4,900/- per month (Rs.3,500/- + Rs.1,400/-). 37. 37. The claimant has suffered 15% disability due to double fractures of the left tibia and he was operated upon for fractures by using method of interlocking and nailing for uniting the tibia bone and such a disability will certainly diminish his earning capability as he will not be able to do his job or routine work and lead his life in the same manner as he was leading prior to the accident. The compensation under the head ‘loss of income’ thus has to be assessed keeping in view the percentage by which his earning capability has been diminished and by applying a suitable multiplier in view of law laid down by Hon'ble Supreme Court in 2010(4) PLR 242 - Yadava Kumar Vs. The Divisional Manager, National Insurance Company Limited. 38. Claimant has suffered permanent disability to the extent of 15% and the monthly loss of income will thus come to Rs.735/- (Rs.4,900/- X .15) and ‘annual loss of income’ will come out to Rs.8,820/- per annum (i.e. Rs.735/- X 12). 39. The claimant was 33 years of age and in view of law laid down in Pranay Sethi’s case (supra), the multiplier of 16 has to be applied which takes the compensation to Rs.1,41,120/- (Rs.8,820/- X 16) on account of ‘loss of in- come’ due to permanent disability. 40. It has come in evidence that claimant had suffered double fracture in left tibia and he was operated upon by way of interlocking nailing of uniting the RENU 2026.07.28 17:04 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document Chandigarh FAO No.1658 of 2005 (O&M) with FAO No.1659 of 2005 (O&M) with FAO No.5565 of 2005 (O&M) with FAO No.5566 of 2005 (O&M) -15- tibia bone. It must have taken at least three months for the injuries to heal and it is a matter of common knowledge that pain component in such injuries is enormous and thereafter, taking into consideration the severity of injuries, he is held entitled to a sum of Rs.20,000/- on account of pain and sufferings. 41. The claimant has been awarded a sum of Rs.15,000/- on account of `expenses incurred on treatment’ as per the medical bills produced on file and no interference in the same is called for. 42. It must have taken three months for the injuries to heal during which period, claimant would have remained bed ridden and would not have been able to do any work and she is accordingly held entitled to a sum of Rs.10,000/- on account of ‘loss of income during the period of treatment’. 43. However, the claimant remained under treatment for a long period. It must have taken at least three months for the injuries to heal and during this pe- riod, she must have spent some amount on transportation as well as on special diet and she is accordingly held entitled to a sum of Rs.5,000/- on account of engag- ing an attendant, Rs.5,000/- on special diet and Rs.2,500/- for transportation. 44. The claimant has suffered 15% of disability on account of fracture in her right tibia and he was operated upon by way of interlocking nailing of right tibia which will impact his day to day activities. Accordingly, the claimant is held entitled to a sum of Rs.10,000/- on account of ‘loss of amenities’. 45. Resultantly, the compensation to be paid to claimant- Rishi Pal is assessed as under:- RENU 2026.07.28 17:04 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document Chandigarh FAO No.1658 of 2005 (O&M) with FAO No.1659 of 2005 (O&M) with FAO No.5565 of 2005 (O&M) with FAO No.5566 of 2005 (O&M) -16- Sr. No. Head of Compensation Amount Assessed by this Court (₹) 1. Loss of income due to permanent disability Rs.1,41,120/- 2. Pain and Sufferings Rs.20,000/- 3. Expenses incurred on treatment Rs.15,000/- 4. Loss of income during period of treatment Rs.10,000/- 5. For engaging an attendant, on special diet and on transporation (composite) Rs.12,500/- 6. Loss of Amenities Rs.10,000/- Total Rs.2,08,620/- Interest 9% 46. As a result of afore-said discussion, the present appeal is partly allowed with costs and the claimant is held entitled to enhanced compensation of Rs.1,47,820/- (Rs.2,08,620/- - Rs.60,800/-) along with interest @ 9% per annum, from the date of filing of claim petition i.e. 13.3.2002, till realization. The liability to pay the enhanced compensation shall be in the same terms as ordered by the Tribunal and after making the payment of the enhanced compensation, Insurance Company shall be at liberty to recover the same from respondent No.1- Rajinder Singh along with interest @6% per annum from the date of deposit till realisation without filing separate appeal. 47. Registry is directed to email the authenticated copy of the award to the respondent Insurance Company in terms of direction issued by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in Writ Petition (Civil) No.534 of 2020 titled Bajaj Allianz General Insurance Company Versus Union of India and others, decided on RENU 2026.07.28 17:04 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document Chandigarh FAO No.1658 of 2005 (O&M) with FAO No.1659 of 2005 (O&M) with FAO No.5565 of 2005 (O&M) with FAO No.5566 of 2005 (O&M) -17- 16.03.2021 and Insurance Company shall comply with the directions as issued under Clause (F) of the said judgment. 48. Appeals in hand as well as pending applications, if any, stand disposed of accordingly. 49. A photocopy of this order be placed on the files of connected cases. (Yashvir Singh Rathor) Judge July 23, 2026 renu Whether Speaking/reasoned Yes/No Whether Reportable Yes/No RENU 2026.07.28 17:04 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document Chandigarh