CWP-18677-2026 -1- IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Serial No. 120 CWP-18677-2026 Decided on:01.07.2026 Raghubir Singh . . . Petitioner Versus Chola MS General Insurance Company Limited and others . . Respondents CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE TRIBHUVAN DAHIYA Present: Mr. Shiv Kumar Rana, Advocate for the petitioner. TRIBHUVAN DAHIYA, J.(ORAL) The petition has been filed inter alia seeking a writ of mandamus directing modification of the award dated 03.02.2026 passed by the Permanent Lok Adalat, Public Utility Services, Bhiwani, in case no. 960/2017 and enhance the amount of compensation payable to the petitioner/claimant. 2. Learned counsel contended that the compensation awarded needs to be enhanced because the estimate for repair expenses of his vehicle was `9,50,000, and against it the claim of only `7,60,000 has been accepted without any justification. 3. A perusal of the impugned order shows that the compensation of `7,60,000 has been awarded to the petitioner on the basis of assessment of loss by the company surveyor, placed on record before the Permanent Lok Adalat in the form of email dated 12.03.2019, Ex. R-4. The claimed amount of `9,50,000 remained unsubstantiated as the petitioner failed to produce any document on record establishing this was the loss assessed so far as damage to MEHAK HURIA 2026.07.07 14:10 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this order/judgment CWP-18677-2026 -2- his vehicle was concerned. The fact has been recorded in the order itself, which could not be disputed by learned counsel for the petitioner. The relevant extract of the order is as under: 27. Of course, the petitioner has averred that car in the damage condition is lying at BA Motors Ltd. for repairing but said Car has not yet been repaired and is still lying in the agency in damaged condition. He has also averred that Surveyor has surveyed the vehicle and prepared the Report of damaged Car, estimating expenses Rs.9,50,000/- but no amount was given. 28. However, petitioner has failed to bring on record the aforesaid estimate of Rs.9,50,000/- on the file nor Claim on the basis of Estimate only can be allowed because Claim amount is to be settled on actual repair basis or total loss basis. 29. Therefore, petitioner is entitled to Claim of Rs.7,60,000/- minus Salvage Value i.e. Rs.12,997/- say Rs.13,000/- minus Excess Clause Rs. 1,000/- (Rs.7,60,000/- minus Rs.13,000/- minus Rs. 1,000/- Rs.7,46,000/-) towards repair of the vehicle. 4. This Court is in agreement with the reasoning recorded. The plea raised by the petitioner cannot be accepted in the absence of any document to show that the claimed amount was actually spent on the repairs. Also, undisputedly he has failed to establish before the Lok Adalat that the damage to his vehicle was of more than `7,60,000, nor has the fact been established before this Court even prima facie. 5. Accordingly, there is no ground to interfere with the impugned award and the petition stands dismissed. (TRIBHUVAN DAHIYA) 01.07.2026 JUDGE Mehak Whether reasoned/speaking? Yes/No Whether reportable? Yes/No MEHAK HURIA 2026.07.07 14:10 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this order/judgment