IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Date of decision: 10.02.2026 FAO-2345-2022(O&M)

Rakesh Kumar ...Appellant(s)

Vs.

Bhupender Kumar Sharma & Others ...Respondent(s)

***

CORAM: HON’BLE MS. JUSTICE NIDHI GUPTA Present:- Mr. Prashant Singh Chauhan, Advocate Mr. Aman Yadav, Advocate for the appellant.

Mr. Ankit Bhardwaj, Advocate Mr. Punit Jain, Advocate for respondent No.3/Insurance Company.

***

NIDHI GUPTA, J.

Present appeal has been filed by injured-claimant seeking enhancement of compensation of Rs.8,37,420/- awarded by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Rewari (hereinafter ‘the learned Tribunal’) vide Award dated 02.12.2021 passed in MACP Case No.546 dated 24.09.2019 filed under Section 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act (hereinafter “the Act”). 2. Brief facts of the case are that the ld. Tribunal on the basis of pleadings and oral & documentary evidence adduced by the parties, concluded that the appellant had suffered injuries in a motor vehicular accident that took place on 13.04.2019 due to the rash and negligent driving of Car bearing registration No.HR-06-AD-5690 (hereinafter “the offending vehicle”) being driven by respondent No.1, owned by respondent No.2 and insured by respondent No.3. The said compensation has been awarded along with interest @ 7.5% per annum. Respondents were held jointly and severally liable to pay the compensation amount.

3. Learned counsel for the appellant seeks enhancement of compensation by submitting that prior to the accident, the appellant was working as an Executive Engineer and drawing a salary of Rs.38,000/- per month. The appellant had duly proved his salary by producing relevant Salary Slips which were proved by his Employer (PW4). Therefore, income of the appellant ought to have been taken as Rs.38,000/- per month; whereas the learned Tribunal has erroneously assessed income of the appellant as only Rs.36,000/- per month. In support of his contentions, learned counsel relies upon judgment of Hon’ble Supreme Court in Hanumantharaju B (Dead) By Lr. V. M. Akram Pasha, (SC) : Law Finder Doc ID # 2730395, wherein it is held that income of the injured has to be assessed as per the last drawn salary.

4. It is also submitted that in view of the fact that the appellant had proven that he was a regular salaried employee, future prospects ought to have been added @ 50%; whereas the learned Tribunal has made an addition of only 40% towards future prospects.

5. Learned counsel further submits that in the accident in question, the appellant had suffered fracture in chest and right leg, as a result of which, the appellant had suffered permanent disability of 12%. However, the learned Tribunal has taken the functional disability to be only 4%. Ld. counsel submits that even as per the Disability Certificate (Ex.P-58), which was duly proven by PW3 Dr. Ajay Yadav, the appellant had suffered 12% permanent disability. No cogent reasons have been given by the learned Tribunal to assess the functional disability of the appellant as only

4%. It is accordingly prayed that the present appeal be allowed.

6. Per contra, learned counsel for respondent No.3 opposes the submissions advanced on behalf of the appellant and submits that the impugned Award suffers from no error; and the present appeal deserves to be dismissed.

7. No other argument is made on behalf of the parties. I have heard learned counsel and perused the case file in detail. I find no merit in the submissions advanced on behalf of the appellant.

8. It is the first contention of the appellant that prior to the accident, he was working as an Executive Engineer at Shiva Infra Solution, Bawal, and had proven that he was drawing salary as Rs.38,000/- per month. The appellant had examined PW4 Prithvi Raj Singh, Manager of the said Company who had produced copy of the Appointment Letter of the appellant as Ex.P-59. PW4 had also proved the Salary Slips of the appellant from January 2019 to April 2019 as Ex.P-60 to Ex.-P-63. Ld. Counsel for the appellant h