$~1 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + MAC.APP. 694/2025 & CM APPL. 67845/2025 SUDHIR KUMAR .....Appellant Through: Mr. Varun Sarin, Ms. Parul Dutta, Advocates.

versus GOVIND & ORS. ( RELIANCE GENERAL INSURANCE CO. LTD.) .....Respondents Through: Mr. A.K. Soni, Advocate.

CORAM:

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANISH DAYAL

O R D E R

% 23.01.2026

1. Mr. Varun Sarin, counsel for appellant, pleads that injury sustained by the appellant in the road accident on 03^rd January 2016, caused due to rash and negligent driving of the vehicle owned by respondent no. 2, insured with respondent no.3, and driven by respondent no.1, led to award of compensation by the impugned judgment 16^th April 2019.

2. At that stage, the assessment of loss of future income basis of disability was made based on the testimony of PW-2, Dr. A.K. Mishra from G.B. Pant Hospital. PW2 had stated that the 50% temporary disability was required to be reviewed after three years, since there were chances of improvement.

3. In this regard, it may be relevant to extract paragraph 15 of the award which records as under:

4. Mr. Sarin points out that on this basis disability was assessed as temporary 50% and since there was a chance of improvement, the impugned award notes the same and grants a lump sum amount of Rs. 3 Lakhs.

5. In this respect paragraph 19 of the impugned award is extracted herein for reference:

6. He states that thereafter, since the condition of the injured-appellant deteriorated considerably, a fresh assessment done by the Civil Surgeon, Faridabad, Haryana, and disability certificate dated 10^th November 2023 has been handed over to the Court in that regard.

7. The said disability certificate is extracted here under for reference:

8. In view of this, Mr. Sarin contends that, considering his disability is now assessed at 70% in relation to both hands and both legs, compensation to be awarded to the appellant may need a reassessment.

9. He, therefore, prays that the matter be remanded to the Tribunal for the limited purpose of enhancement based on the new disability certificate, with liberty to the parties to lead their respective evidence in this regard.

10. Mr. A.K. Soni, counsel appearing for Insurance Company, reserving his right to counter the contentions of appellant, states that he has no objection to the matter being remanded.

11. Accordingly, the matter is remanded back to the Tribunal on the specific issue of revisiting reassessment of future income and the non- pecuniary compensation towards pain and suffering, as well as special diet, conveyance, and attendant charges, considering the fresh evidence which may be placed by the parties in respect of the new disability certificate.

12. It is made clear that this Court has not expressed its view on the merits of the renewed claim of the appellant and it shall be open to the Tribunal to revisit the same in accordance with law basis the evidence led by the parties. 13. Accordingly, list on 16^th February 2026 before the Tribunal at MACT, South District, Saket Courts.

14. The appeal is, accordingly, disposed of. Pending applications (if any)

are also rendered infructuous.

15. Order be uploaded on the website of this Court.

ANISH DAYAL, J JANUARY 23, 2026/RK/bp