##PAGE1##

1 of 5

::: Downloaded on - 31-01-2026 09:41:24 :::

FAO No.1721 of 1995 2026:PHHC: 012899

awarded, par(cid:9)cularly for loss of future earnings due to permanent disability,

is wholly inadequate and contrary to setiled principles of law.

4. Despite service, none appeared on behalf of the Insurance

Company at the (cid:9)me of hearing.

5. This Court has considered the submissions of learned counsel for

the appellant and has carefully examined the record.

6. Contributory Negligence: The Claimant’s version is that while he

was travelling as a pillion rider on scooter No.HR-14-0438, driven by his

cousin Jai Bhagwan, the offending Maru(cid:9) car, driven rashly and negligentl,

collided with the scooter near village Sankhol, resul(cid:9)ng in serious injuries to

him.

7. The Insurance Company relied upon DDR No.19 dated

08.09.1992 (Ex. PF), recorded on the statement of Jai Bhagwan, the scooter

driver himself, wherein it was stated that a cow suddenly crossed the road

and, in an atiempt to save the animal, the scooter struck against the car. It

was clearly recorded that the accident did not occur due to the fault of the

car driver.

8. The claimant appeared as PW-2 and denied this version but

admitied that Jai Bhagwan was his first cousin and that rela(cid:9)ons between

them were cordial. Significantly, Jai Bhagwan, the scooter driver and author

of the DDR, was not examined to rebut or explain the contents of the

contemporaneous police record.

9. The Tribunal noted that the DDR was recorded at the Medical

College Hospital, Rohtak, where the claimant himself was admitied, lending

credibility to its contents. From the material on record, the Tribunal inferred

that both the scooter driver and the car driver had an opportunity to avoid

the accident and that lack of due care on the part of both contributed to the

occurrence.

10. It is well setiled that contributory negligence need not to be

proved only by direct evidence and can be inferred from atiending

Page 2 of 5

2 of 5

::: Downloaded on - 31-01-2026 09:41:25 :::

FAO No.1721 of 1995 2026:PHHC: 012899

circumstances. Where the facts probabilise negligence on the part of more

than one vehicle, appor(cid:9)onment of liability is legally permissible. The

Tribunal’s finding of equal negligence is thus a reasonable inference based on

evidence and does not warrant interference.

11. Accordingly, the finding that the offending car was responsible

only to the extent of 50% is affirmed.

12. Assessment of Compensa(cid:9)on : As per evidence on record, the

claimant remained admitied in Medical College and Hospital, Rohtak fro

07.09.1992 to 16.09.1992, where his right leg as amputated below the knee.

Due to complica(cid:9)ons and non-healing of the wound, he was subsequently

admitied to Haryana Nursing Home, Rohtak, where a second surgery was

performed on 20.10.1992, resul(cid:9)ng in amputa(cid:9)on above the knee. The

disability cer(cid:9)ficate on record establishes 80% permanent disability. The

claimant was 42 years of age and engaged in agriculture at the (cid:9)me of

accident.

13. In Raj Kumar v. Ajay Kumar and another, (2011) 1 SCC 343, the

Supreme Court authorita(cid:9)vely laid down that assessment of compensa(cid:9)on in

cases of permanent disability must focus on func(cid:9)onal disability and its

impact on earning capacity, and not merely the percentage of physical

disability. In the present case, amputa(cid:9)on above the knee of the right leg of

an agriculturalist substan(cid:9)ally affects his earning capacity, jus(cid:9)fying adop(cid:9)on

of the disability percentage for computa(cid:9)on of loss of future earnings.

14. The Tribunal assessed the claimant’s income at ₹1,000/- per

month. Considering the year of accident (1992), the claimant’s voca(cid:9)on and

prevailing minimum wages in Haryana, this assessment is found to be

reasonable and is upheld.

15. However, the Tribunal erred in not gran(cid:9)ng any addi(cid:9)on

towards future prospects and in applying an incorrect mul(cid:9)plier. In Na(cid:30)onal

Insurance Co