Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH
HARKESH MANUJA
Sanjay @ Sanju – Appellant
Versus
Devender @ Pappa – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. procedural context and factual background of the motor accident claim. (Para 1 , 2 , 3) |
| 2. contending arguments regarding negligence and evidentiary validity. (Para 4 , 5) |
| 3. fir delay and strict proof thresholds are not fatal to motor accident claims. (Para 6 , 7 , 8 , 9 , 10) |
| 4. assessment of just and fair compensation for functional disability and personal injury. (Para 11 , 12 , 13 , 14 , 15 , 16) |
| 5. determination of pecuniary and non-pecuniary damages for injured claimants. (Para 17 , 18 , 19 , 20 , 21) |
| 6. granting interest on compensation and final adjudication of appeals. (Para 22 , 23) |
JUDGMENT :
HARKESH MANUJA, J.
1. The present appeals have been preferred against the award dated 04.10.2011 passed by the learned Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Rohtak (for short “the Tribunal”), whereby the claim petitions filed by the appellant(s) was/were dismissed. Since both the claim petitions arise out of the same accident dated 06.05.2010, the same are being disposed of by this common judgment.
FACTS
2. The case of the appellants was that on 06.05.2010 at about 9:00 A.M., the appellants were travelling on a motorcycle from village Titoli to Rohtak, when a jeep bearing regist
The delay in lodging the FIR does not invalidate a claim for compensation. The compensation awarded should cover pain, suffering, loss of income, medical expenses, loss of amenities, and loss of futu....
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
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
