F.A.O No. 2098 of 2007

-1-

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA

AT CHANDIGARH

F.A.O No. 2098 of 2007

Date of decision:- 20.08.2015

Baljinder Singh @ Balwinder Singh

...Appellant

Versus

Rameshwar Dass & others

...Respondents

CORAM:

HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE RITU BAHRI

Present:-

Mr. L.S. Sandhu, Advocate

for the appellant.

None for the respondents.

1. To be referred to the Reporters or not?

2. Whether the judgment should be reported in the Digest?

RITU BAHRI J.

1.

The present appeal has been preferred by the

injured/claimant-appellant (for short 'the appellant'), seeking

enhancement of the amount of compensation awarded by the learned

Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Sirsa (for short, 'the Tribunal') to the

tune of Rs.70,00/- along with interest @ 7.5 per cent from the date of

filing of the petition till realization of the amount, vide impugned

award dated 27.09.2006.

FACTS NOT IN DISPUTE

2.

Petitioner who is 21 years of age is working as a driver

GAURAV ARORA

2015.09.21 14:06

I attest to the accuracy and

integrity of this document

F.A.O No. 2098 of 2007

-2-

under Jaspal Singh and on 01.01.2003, he during his employment

under Jaspal Singh, was driving Car bearing No. DL-5C-5466 and when

the car reached near Bhaini Maharaj Pur, a bus bearing registration No.

DL-AA-PA 2839 overtook a truck, which was parked by the side of the

road, and struck the back side of the car, driven by the petitioner, in

which the petitioner sustained injuries and became unconscious and

was taken to the hospital with multiple injuries including compound

fracture of right hip joint. He remained admitted at PGI Rohtak from

01.01.2003 to 12.01.2003 and was operated upon. F.I.R. No. 98 dated

25.03.2003 under Sections 279/337/338 IPC etc was registered in this

regard.

3.

P.W.3 Dr. Kulbhushan Garg who was member of the Board

of Directors who medico-legally examined the petitioner and found it

to be an old case of fracture left femur with interlocking nailing done

in the right side. Fresh X ray was advised. Disability certificate was

issued on 25.01.2006, vide which the disability was assessed at 20

percent. However, in cross examination, the witness made clear that

the disability pertains to a particular limb (right lower limb) only.

The petitioner produced medical bills regarding purchase of medicines

and implants for operation Ex PW4 to PW12 for an amount of

Rs.14,201/-.

GAURAV ARORA

2015.09.21 14:06

I attest to the accuracy and

integrity of this document

F.A.O No. 2098 of 2007

-3-

ARGUMENTS ADVANCED

4.

The learned counsel for the appellant contends that the

Tribunal has erred in awarding the compensation to the appellant to

the tune of Rs.70,000/- only, as the appellant had suffered multiple

injuries including fracture on the right hip joint and remained in

hospital and a rod was inserted in the right leg. He is not able to walk

properly and cannot drive and has become disabled to the extent of

100%.

4.

To give force to its contention, reference has been made

to a judgment passed by the Delhi High Court in a case of Angad

Kumar vs. Gopal Bahadur and others, 2014 AAC 2353 wherein the

claimant was aged 19 years and was working as a Labourer, suffered

80% disability due to accident. His monthly salary was assessed at

Rs.3953/- applicable to unskilled worker. He suffered loss of amenities

of life and his face also disfigured. Chances of his getting employment

became minimal. Award of Rs.20,000/- towards pain and suffering

enhanced to Rs.50,000/-, Rs 30,000/- towards loss of amenities

enhanced to Rs.50,000/-, Rs.80,000/- towards loss of disfigurement and

marriage prospect enhanced to Rs.1,00,000/-. Compensation at 50%

towards future prospects also granted and total amount of

compensation was enhanced from Rs. 7,37,563/- to Rs.10,63,782/-. In

GAURAV ARORA

2015.09.21 14:06

I attest to the accuracy and

integrity of this document

F.A.O No. 2098 of 2007

-4-

para 12, it has been observed a