SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
judgment-img

2025 Supreme(P&H) 343

PUNJAB AND HARYANA HIGH COURT AT CHANDIGARH
SUDEEPTI SHARMA
Nirmal Kumar – Appellant
Versus
Sudesh Kumar – Respondent


Advocates Appeared:
For the Appellant :Mr. R.S Mamli, Advocate
For the Respondent:Mr. V.K. Garg, Advocate

JUDGMENT :

Sudeepti Sharma, J. (Oral)

1. The present appeal has been preferred against the award dated 20.11.2006 passed in the claim petition filed under Section 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 by the learned Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Jagadhri (for short, 'the Tribunal') for enhancement of compensation, granted to the appellant/claimant to the tune of Rs.3,25,000/- on account of the injuries sustained by the appellant-Nirmal Kumar in a Motor Vehicular Accident, occurred on 02.07.2004.

2. As sole issue for determination in the present appeal is confined to quantum of compensation awarded by the learned Tribunal, a detailed narration of the facts of the case is not reproduced and is skipped herein for the sake of brevity.

SUBMISSIONS OF THE LEARNED COUNSELS FOR THE PARTIES

3. The learned counsel for the appellant/claimant contends that the compensation assessed by the learned Tribunal is on the lower side. He further contends that the appellant was working as skilled automobile mechanic and was also having a canter, which he used to ply on hire basis and was earning Rs.15000/- per month and was 24 years of age at the time of the accident. He further contends:-

ii) That he rema

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top