JUDGMENT :

SUDEEPTI SHARMA, J.

1. The present appeal has been preferred against the award dated 26.08.2016 passed by the learned Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Sangrur in the claim petition filed under Section 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 (for short, 'the Tribunal’) for enhancement of compensation granted to the claimant to the tune of Rs.1,70,000/-(rounded off) (i.e half of Rs.3,39,660/- on account of contributory negligence of the claimant) along with interest @ 7.5% per annum, on account of injuries suffered by him in a Motor Vehicular Accident, occurred on 26.08.2012 as well as making appellant liable for contributory negligence.

FACTS NOT IN DISPUTE

2. Brief facts of the case are that on 26.08.2012, the claimant along with his friends Sunil Mittal, Sunny was going from Bhawanigarh to Sangrur on scooter. Sunny was driving the scooter on normal speed and on correct side. In the morning, at about 4.00 AM, when they reached near canal drain of village Ghabdan, lights of a vehicle, coming from opposite direction, reflected in the eyes of Sunny, as a result of which they could not see a Canter bearing registration No.RJ-18GA-0574 wrongly parked in the middle of the road by respondent No.1, without any indicator on, as a result of which their scooter struck into the Canter and all the occupants of scooter fell dowa on the road and the claimant received multiple grievous and his leg was fractured. The claimant contacted his father telephonically, who reached at the spot within few minutes. His father removed him to Rajindra Hospital, but keeping in view his serious condition, he was referred to Amar Hospital, Patiala. On next day, DDR No.26 of 27.8.12 was lodged in Police Station Sadar, Sangrur. It has been alleged that the claimant suffered injuries due to negligent act of the respondent No. 1.

3. Upon notice of the claim petition, respondents appeared and filed their separate written replies denying the factum of the accident/compensation.

4. From the pleadings of the parties, the learned Tribunal framed the following issues:-

“1. Whether Chander Shekhar received injuries in a motor vehicle accident which took place on 26.8.2012on account of rash and negligent driving of Canter bearing registration No.RJ-18GA-0574 which was being driven by respondent No.1 on 26.7.2013?OPP

2. If issue No.1 is proved, whether the claimant is entitled to compensation, if so, to what extent and from whom? OPP

3. Whether the respondent No.1 was not holding valil and effective driving license at the time of accident, if so its effect?OPR

4. Relief.”

5. After taking into consideration the pleadings and the evidence on record, the learned Tribunal has awarded compensation to the claimant/appellant. However, 50% of the compensation was awarded to the appellant/claimant on account of his contributory negligence. Hence the present appeal.

SUBMISSIONS OF LEARNED COUNSEL FOR THE PARTIES

6. Learned counsel for the appellant–claimant contends that the learned Tribunal has erred in law and on facts in holding that the accident occurred due to contributory negligence on the part of the appellant, who was admittedly only a pillion rider. He further submits that the offending vehicle was improperly parked on the road during night hours without any indication, reflector, or parking lights, thereby creating a hazardous obstruction. In such circumstances, the entire liability ought to have been fastened upon respondent No. 1–driver of the offending vehicle.

7. Learned counsel for the appellant further argued that the compensation awarded by the learned Tribunal is inadequate and does not commensurate with the nature of injuries, disability, and other consequential losses suffered by the claimant.

8. On the strength of these submissions, learned counsel prays that the present appeal be allowed and the impugned award be suitably modified.

9. Per contra, learned counsel for respondent No. 2, however, vehemently argues that the award has rightly been passed towards contributory