IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH

234 FAO-2327-2007 Date of decision: 09.07.2025 Raghuvinder Kaur ...Appellant Versus Richhpal Singh @ Balu and others ...Respondents CORAM: HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE SUDEEPTI SHARMA Present: Mr. B.S. Mamli, Advocate for the appellant.

Mr. Sandeep Suri, Advocate for respondent No.3-Insurance Company.

****

SUDEEPTI SHARMA, J. (ORAL)

1. The present appeal has been preferred against the award dated 23.01.2006 passed in the claim petition filed under Section 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 (for short ‘the Act’) by the learned Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Yamuna Nagar at Jagadhri (for short, 'the Tribunal') for enhancement of compensation granted to claimant/appellant Raghuvinder Kaur to the tune of Rs.75,000/- along with interest @ 7.5 % per annum, on account of injuries sustained by her in a Motor Vehicle Accident, occurred on 27.09.2004.

2. As sole issue for determination in the present appeal is confined to quantum of compensation awarded by the learned Tribunal, a detailed narration of the facts of the case is not required to be reproduced and is skipped herein for the sake of brevity.

SUBMISSIONS OF THE LEARNED COUNSELS FOR THE PARTIES

3. Learned counsel for the appellant contends that the compensation access by the learned Tribunal is on the lower side. He further contends that learned Tribunal has not applied multiplier system while granting the compensation. He further contends:-

i) That the claimant/appellant (minor) was 14 years age at the time of accident and she suffered permanent disability to the extent of 15 % due to accident in question.

ii) He further contends that the compensation granted under the head of future loss to income, medical expenses, pain and suffering, attendant charges and special diet is also on lower side. Therefore, he prays that the present appeal be allowed and compensation be enhanced, as per settled law. 4. Per contra, learned counsel for the respondent-Insurance Company has vehemently argues on the lines of the award and submits that the amount of compensation as assessed by the learned Tribunal, has rightly been granted to the claimant/appellant. Therefore, he prays for dismissal of the appeal.

5. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the whole record of this case.

SETTLED LAW OF HON’BLE SUPREME COURT REGARDING GRANT OF COMPENSATION WITH RESPECT TO DISABILITY

6. Hon’ble the Supreme Court has settled the law regarding grant of compensation with respect to the disability. The Apex Court in case titled as Raj Kumar Vs. Ajay Kumar and Another (2011) 1 Supreme Court Cases 343, has held as under:-

General principles relating to compensation in injury cases

5. The provision of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 ('Act' for short) makes it clear that the award must be just, which means that compensation should, to the extent possible, fully and adequately restore the claimant to the position prior to the accident. The object of awarding damages is to make good the loss suffered as a result of wrong done as far as money can do so, in a fair, reasonable and equitable manner. The court or tribunal shall have to assess the damages objectively and exclude from consideration any speculation or fancy, though some conjecture with reference to the nature of disability and its consequences, is inevitable. A person is not only to be compensated for the physical injury, but also for the loss which he suffered as a result of such injury. This means that he is to be compensated for his inability to lead a full life, his inability to enjoy those normal amenities which he would have enjoyed but for the injuries, and his inability to earn as much as he used to earn or could have earned. (See C.K. Subramonia Iyer v. T. Kunhikuttan Nair, AIR 1970 Supreme Court 376, R.D. Hattangadi v. Pest Control (India) Ltd., 1995 (1) SCC 551 and Baker v. Willoughby, 1970 AC 467).

6. The heads under which compensation is awarded in personal injury cases are the following : Pecunia