IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA

AT CHANDIGARH

Reserved on: 11.11.2025

Pronounced on:- 18.12.2025

Uploaded on:-18.12.2025

RAM SINGH …..Appellant

Vs.

RAKESH AND OTHERS …..Respondents

CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE HARKESH MANUJA

Present: Mr. Tara Chand Dhanwal, Advocate

for the appellant.

Mr. Vinod Gupta, Advocate

for respondent No.3- Insurance Company.

******

HARKESH MANUJA, J.

1. By way of present appeal, challenge has been laid to an award dated 23.09.2008, passed by learned Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Bhiwani (for brevity, “the Tribunal”), whereby an amount of Rs. 1,00,000/- was awarded as compensation to the appellant/claimant along with interest @ 7.5% per annum from the date of institution of the claim petition till realization of the award

amount, on account of injuries suffered by him in a vehicular accident.

FACTS

2. The appellant, being injured filed a claim petition before the Ld. Tribunal praying for grant of compensation on account of injuries suffered by him in a motor vehicular accident which took place on 27.11.2006 while alleging rash and

negligent driving of vehicle No. HR-61/1095 being driven by respondent No.1/driver.

3. After going through the claim petition and evaluating the evidence led by both the parties, learned Tribunal vide award dated 23.09.2008,arrived at a conclusion that the accident occurred on account of rash and negligent driving of respondent No.1 and awarded Rs. 1,00,000/- as compensation in favour of the appellant.

4. Being aggrieved against the aforesaid award dated 23.09.2008; the present appeal has been preferred for enhancement of compensation. Facts as specified in the claim petition and the issue regarding negligence of the driver been recorded in favour of the appellant/claimant by the Learned Tribunal being not in dispute, for the sake of brevity, those are not being repeated here.

ARGUMENTS ON BEHALF OF APPELLANT/CLAIMANT

5. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the appellant/claimant contended that the amount awarded by the learned Tribunal was grossly meager and disproportionate to the nature and extent of injuries sustained by the appellant/claimant. It was submitted that the Tribunal failed to appreciate the settled principles laid down by the Hon’ble Apex Court governing the assessment of just and fair compensation in injury cases. He further argued that the appellant/claimant suffered permanent disability to the extent of 40%, rendering him incapable of performing any gainful employment in future; therefore, the Tribunal ought to have granted adequate compensation towards future loss of income by applying the appropriate multiplier and taking into consideration the permanent and incapacitating nature of the disability. Accordingly, he prayed that the compensation be suitably enhanced in accordance with the settled law so as to meet the ends of justice.

ON BEHALF OF RESPONDENT No.3/INSURANCE COMPANY

6. Per contra, learned counsel for respondent No.3/Insurance Company vehemently contended that in the facts and circumstances of the case, the appellant was adequately compensated, thus, the present appeal was liable to be dismissed.

DISCUSSION

7. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the paper-book of the case as well. I find force in the arguments advanced by learned Counsel for appellant/claimant.

8. Upon perusal of the Award, another aspect requiring consideration in the present appeal pertains to the circumstances of the accident. The incident occurred on the intervening night of 26/27.11.2006 at about 3:30 a.m. The claimant/appellant, employed as a conductor on the vehicle bearing registration No. HR-61/1095, was travelling from Sirsa to Bhiwani after loading plastic waste, and the said vehicle was being driven by respondent No.1. When the vehicle approached the area near village Chikanwas, a mule suddenly came on the road. At the same time, the driver was momentarily blinded by the headlights of an oncoming vehicle from the opposite direction, causing respondent No.1 to l