Punjab-Haryana High Court
Jaspal Singh vs Surinder Singh & Ors on 17 October, 2012
Author: Rajan Gupta
Bench: Rajan Gupta
FAO No. 4992 of 2011 1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT
CHANDIGARH
FAO No. 4992 of 2011
Date of decision : 17.10.2012
Jaspal Singh
....Appellant
V/s
Surinder Singh & ors.
....Respondents
BEFORE : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJAN GUPTA
Present: None for the appellant.
Ms. Vandana Malhotra, Advocate
for respondent no. 3.
RAJAN GUPTA J. (ORAL)
Present appeal has been preferred by the appellant dis- satisfied with the quantum of compensation granted by the tribunal.
Appellant remains unrepresented before this court. However, in the grounds of appeal it has been stated that compensation granted is on the lower side. Same needs to be enhanced.
Learned counsel for respondent no. 3-insurance company submits that compensation has been correctly calculated by the tribunal. Same deserves to be maintained.
I have heard learned counsel for the parties.
A claim petition was preferred by appellant- Jaspal Singh. He stated that on 26.01.2009 at about 8.30 p.m. he was coming from Hisar to his village Nanhera, on his Mini Truck no. PB-11AG-8149. When he reached near Barwala Township, offending vehicle (a truck) FAO No. 4992 of 2011 2 bearing registration no. PB-12G-6169 coming from opposite direction struck against his truck. As a result, he suffered multiple injuries and had to undergo treatment in a private hospital from where he was referred to PGI, Chandigarh on 31.01.2009 and remained admitted till 04.02.2009. Tribunal came to the conclusion that accident had occurred due to rash and negligent driving by driver of the offending vehicle. It after considering the medical bills/receipts exhibited by the appellant, granted a compensation of `44,296/- which was rounded off to `45,000/- towards medical treatment. As appellant remained admitted for medical treatment from 26.01.2009 to 04.02.2009, `20,000/- was awarded towards loss of income. `5,000/- was awarded on account of pain and suffering. Another sum of `10,000/- was granted on account of transportation, special diet and expenses of attendant etc. Total compensation was worked out as `80,000/-. Considering the fact that appellant remained under medical treatment from 26.01.2009 to 10.02.2009 and undergone a surgery, amount granted on account of pain and suffering appears to be on lower side. In my considered view, appellant would be entitled to another sum of `15,000/- on this account. Appeal is allowed in these terms and rest of the award is maintained as such.
As the case has been heard and decided on merits, delay of 92 days in filing the appeal is deemed to have been condoned.
October 17, 2012 (RAJAN GUPTA) Ajay JUDGE