FAO-6451-2010(O&M) 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH 109 FAO-6451-2010(O&M) Date of decision: 16.02.2026 Krishna Kumari ….Appellant Versus State of Haryana & ors. ....Respondents CORAM:- HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE NIDHI GUPTA Present:- Ms. Lipika, Advocate for the appellant. NIDHI GUPTA, J. CM-28129-CII-2010 This is an applicaon for producing medical bills/ Annexure P-1 to show that applicant/appellant has been connuously under treatment and has spent more than Rs.2.00 lacs on her treatment. However, a perusal of said Annexure P-1 shows that the said bills pertain to total knee replacement undergone by the appellant on 01.04.2010. There is nothing whatsoever on record to indicate that the said knee replacement was occasioned on account of, or is in any manner connected with the injury suffered by the applicant/appellant in the accident dated 10.03.1997. Accordingly, present applicaon stands dismissed. Main case 1. The present appeal has been filed by the injured-claimant seeking enhancement of compensaon of Rs.50,000/- awarded by the learned Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Kurukshetra (for short “the learned Tribunal”) vide Award dated 16.12.1997 passed in MACT Case No.149 of 1997 dated MONIKA VERMA 2026.02.18 09:27 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/judgment chandigarh FAO-6451-2010(O&M) 2 23.05.1997 filed under Secons 166, 140 and 141 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 (hereina<er referred to as ‘the Act’). 2. Brief facts of the case are that the ld. Tribunal on the basis of evidence adduced by the pares concluded that the appellant had suffered injuries in a motor vehicular accident that took place on 10.03.1997 due to the rash and negligent driving of Haryana Roadways Bus bearing Registraon No.HR-37/1954 (hereina<er “the offending vehicle”); being owned by respondents No.1 and 2 and driven by respondent No.3. The said compensaon was awarded along with interest @ 12% per annum. Respondents No.1 to 3 were held jointly and severally liable to pay the compensaon. 3. Leaned counsel for the appellants seeks enhancement of compensaon by submiCng that in granng meager compensaon of Rs.50,000/-, the learned Tribunal has not appreciated the evidence on record to the effect that the appellant was hospitalized for about one month. In the accident, the appellant had suffered permanent disability and is sll under treatment. The Tribunal has not even considered the bills on record. Nothing has been awarded to the appellant under the convenonal heads. Even the interest has also been granted on the lower side. It is accordingly prayed that the present Appeal be allowed; and the compensaon be enhanced. 4. No other argument is raised on behalf of the appellant. I have heard learned counsel for the appellant and perused the case file in detail. I find no merit in the submissions made on behalf of the appellant. 5. The appellant has contended that in the accident in queson she had suffered injury on her right knee and injuries on different parts of her MONIKA VERMA 2026.02.18 09:27 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/judgment chandigarh FAO-6451-2010(O&M) 3 body; and that she had suffered disability of 15%. In support, the appellant has produced the disability cerficate Ex.A-12. As per the said disability cerficate Ex.A-12, the appellant has suffered 15% disability entailing “moderate limitaon of right knee joint”. The appellant has also produced other documentary evidence in the form of Ex.A94 to Ex.A104 to show that the appellant remained under treatment at Gaba Hospital, Yamuna Nagar; and Ex.A-13 MLR. However, admiJedly the appellant has failed to examine any doctor to prove any of the above said documentary evidence. Thus, the said documents cannot be of any help to the appellant. 6. A perusal of the record of the case further shows that the appellant has stated before the learned Tribunal that prior to the accident, she was in regular employment of the Haryana Government since 01.04.1977. Appellant had stated that a<er the accident, she is drawing half pay from the department; and before the accident, her carry home salary was Rs.5000/- per month. 7. The appellant had also produced medical bills Ex.A94 to Ex.A145 for a total amount of Rs.24406.87; in respect of which an amount of Rs.25000/- was duly granted to the appellant by learned Tribunal as medical expenses. Learned Tribunal has further awarded consolidated amount of Rs.25,000/- towards pain and suffering. 8. Further there is nothing on record to connect the injury suffered by the appellant on 10.3.1997 with the medical evidence dated 01.04.2010 sought to be produced by the appellant in respect of her knee replacement. There is nothing in the said medical record to even indicate as to which knee, whether le< or right knee, has been replaced. The said medical evidence only MONIKA VERMA 2026.02.18 09:27 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/judgment chandigarh FAO-6451-2010(O&M) 4 shows that the appellant has undergone total knee replacement unilaterla on 24.03.2010. There is nothing whatsoever on record to indicate that in the intervening period from 1997, ll 2010, the appellant had undergone any treatment for the injuries sustained by her in the accident dated 10.03.1997. 9. In view of the discussion above, no ground is made out to enhance the compensaon awarded to the appellant. The present appeal stands dismissed. 10. Pending applicaon(s) if any also stand(s) disposed of. (NIDHI GUPTA) 16.02.2026 JUDGE monika i) Whether speaking/reasoned? Yes/No ii) Whether reportable? Yes/No MONIKA VERMA 2026.02.18 09:27 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/judgment chandigarh