IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH
DARSHAN SINGH, J.
Hoshiar Singh - Appellant
Versus
Mohinder Singh Chauhan and others - Respondents
FAO No.4918 of 2011 (O&M), FAO No.5899 of 2011 (O&M)
Decided On : 23-08-2016
Condonation of Delay - Motor Accidents Claims - Limitation Act - Section 5 - Section 151 CPC - Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 - Section 166 - Actio Personalis Moritur Cum Persona
Fact of the Case:
The judgment disposed of two appeals arising from the same award passed by the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal. The appeals were filed by the owner and the driver of the offending vehicle to challenge the compensation awarded to the legal representatives of the deceased claimant who suffered injuries in a motor vehicular accident.
Finding of the Court:
The court allowed the appeals partly, reducing the compensation payable to the legal representatives from Rs. 4,65,000 to Rs. 2,50,000, based on the legal principles governing compensation for personal suffering and disability, and the concept of 'actio personalis moritur cum persona'.
Issues: The main issue was the entitlement of the legal representatives to compensation for non-pecuniary losses, such as grievous injuries, permanent disability, and pain and suffering, following the death of the claimant during the pendency of the claim petition.
Ratio Decidendi: The court held that the legal representatives were only entitled to compensation for loss of estate, and not for non-pecuniary losses, based on the legal principle that 'actio personalis moritur cum persona' applies only to personal or bodily injuries and not to the loss caused to the estate of the deceased.
Final Decision: The court reduced the compensation payable to the legal representatives to Rs. 2,50,000 from Rs. 4,65,000, and directed interest on the reduced amount from the date of filing the petition till realization, in accordance with the determination by the learned Tribunal.
DARSHAN SINGH, J.
CM-22452-CII-2011 in FAO-5899-2011
There is delay of 97 days in filing the FAO No.5899 of 2011. The appellant has filed an application under Section 5 of the Limitation Act read with Section 151 CPC for condonation of delay.
Heard on the application.
In view of the reasons mentioned in the application, same is allowed and the delay in filing the appeal is hereby condoned.
Main Appeals
This judgment shall dispose of both the appeals mentioned above which have been arisen out of the same award dated 10.03.2011 passed by the learned Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Jhajjar (hereinafter called the “Tribunal”) whereby deceased injured Mohinder Singh Chauhan through his legal representatives has been awarded compensation to the tune of Rs.4,65,000/- on account of the injuries suffered by him in the motor vehicular accident which took place on 28.04.2007.
2. FAO No.4918 of 2011 has been filed by Hoshiar Singh, the owner of the offending vehicle and FAO No.5899 of 2011 has been preferred by Rampal the driver of the said vehicle to assail the award.
3. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and gone through the record of the case meticulously.
4. Learned counsel for the appellants contended that Mohinder Singh Chauhan has filed the claim petition under Section 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 for grant of compensation on account of the injuries suffered by him in the motor vehicular accident which took place on 28.04.2007. They contended that during the pendency of the claim petition, Mohinder Singh Chauhan has died in another motor vehicular accident on 10.03.2010 and, thereafter his legal representatives were brought on record.
5. They contended that as the claimant had died, the legal representatives of the injured-claimant were only entitled for compensation which was loss of estate. The learned Tribunal was not justified in granting the compensation towards the non-pecuniary losses i.e. the compensation on account of grievous injuries, compensation on account of permanent disability and compensation on account of pain and suffering. Thus, they contended that the amount of compensation awarded by the learned Tribunal against law.
6. On the other hand, learned counsel for respondents No.1 & 2 contended that the claimant has suffered serious injuries in this accident. He suffered 40% permanent disability and also spent huge amount on his treatment. He also suffered loss of income. Thus, he contended that the award passed by the learned Tribunal does not call for any interference.
7. I have duly considered the aforesaid contentions.
8. It is an admitted fact that the claim petition was filed by injured Mohinder Singh Chauhan for grant of compensation on account of the injuries suffered by him in the motor vehicular accident which took place on 28.04.2007. It is also not disputed that during the pendency of the present claim petition said Mohinder Singh Chauhan has died in another motor vehicular accident. So, Mohinder Singh Chauhan, the claimant has died during the pendency of claim petition not due to the injuries received in this accident but on account of another motor vehicular accident and thereafter, the present claim petition was pursued by his legal representatives.
9. In order to determine the amount of compensation to the victim of the accident the Court has to determine the pecuniary and non pecuniary losses. It is settled principle of law that the compensation on account of personal suffering and disability dies with the claimant. The legal representatives of the claimant can only pursue the claim petition towards loss of estate. Thus, where the claimant dies during the pendency of the claim petition, his legal representatives can survive the claim only with respect to loss of estate.
10. The maxim 'actio personalis moritur cum persona' relates only to the personal or bodily injuries and not to
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.