Punjab-Haryana High Court
Raj Kumar Chalia vs Joga Singh & Ors on 9 April, 2024
Author: Suvir Sehgal
Bench: Suvir Sehgal
Neutral Citation No:=2024:PHHC:048179
FAO-1128-1993 (O&M) -1-
Neutral Citation No. 2024:PHHC:048179
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT
CHANDIGARH
139-3
FAO-1128-1993 (O&M)
Date of Decision:09.04.2024
Raj Kumar Chalia
.... Appellant
Vs
Shri Joga Singh and others
..... Respondents
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SUVIR SEHGAL
Present: Mr. Maneet Kaushik, Advocate for
Mr. Ashit Malik, Advocate for the appellant.
Mr. Harkirat Singh, Advocate for
Mr. Vikram Singh, Advocate for respondent No.1.
None for respondents No. 2 and 5.
Mr. Neeraj Khanna, Advocate for
Mr. R.N. Singal, Advocate for respondent No.3.
Mr. Suvir Dewan, Advocate for respondent No.6.
***
SUVIR SEHGAL, J. (ORAL)
1. By way of instant appeal filed under the Motor Vehicles
Act, 1988, claimant-appellant has approached this Court, for
enhancement of compensation awarded by the Motor Accident Claims
Tribunal (for short "the Tribunal"), Bhiwani and for modification of
1 of 4
Neutral Citation No:=2024:PHHC:048179
FAO-1128-1993 (O&M) -2-
award dated 18.02.1993, whereby he has been awarded Rs.68,400/-
for the injuries suffered by him.
2. Factual background, in brief, may be noticed. As the result
of vehicular accident between a Tempo and a stationary vehicle,
appellant, who was a passenger in the Tempo suffered injuries. A
claim petition has been filed under Section 166 of the Motor Vehicles
Act, 1988, claiming Rs. 5 Lacs as compensation.
4. I have heard counsel for the parties and examined the
available record with their able assistance.
5. On the basis of evidence led by the parties, the Tribunal
returned a finding that both the vehicles were at fault and apportioned
in liability in the ratio of half and half. Appellant produced a disability
certificate, Ex.P-6, as well as examined PW-5, Dr. P.K. Bhatia,
Orthopedic Surgeon, in support of his claim. The Tribunal came to the
conclusion that his permanent effective disability is between 25% to
30%. Although as per the disability certificate, his handicap had been
certified at 33%. The appellant was working as a Cobbler and as he
was remained confined to bed for six months, the Tribunal assessed
his monthly income at Rs.1000/- and determined the loss of income as
Rs.6000/-. The Tribunal also awarded an amount of Rs.4,000/- on
account of medical treatment, special diet and other miscellaneous
expenses. Assessing the loss due to disability in the left hand at
Rs.2000/- per month and applying the multiplier of 16, an amount of
Rs.38,400/- was awarded. In all, as noticed above, the appellant was
awarded Rs.68,400/-. It was ordered by the Tribunal that half of the
2 of 4
Neutral Citation No:=2024:PHHC:048179
FAO-1128-1993 (O&M) -3-
awarded amount shall be recovered jointly and severally from
respondents No.1 and 2 and the remaining half from respondents No.5
and 6, jointly and severally.
6. In Raj Kumar Versus Ajay Kumar and another, 2011(1)
SCC 343, Supreme Court has held that where an injured has suffered
a permanent disability and his actual earning capacity has been
reduced, compensation has to be awarded by determining the
functional disability. Three steps have been laid down by the Supreme
Court. Following the observations of the Supreme Court as well as the
evidence led by the claimant, this Court is of the view that functional
disability of the claimant-appellant can safely be determined @ 50%.
Appellant has not only suffered physical disability but he could not
even continue with his job as his work was not found to be
satisfactory by his employer, after the accident. Counsel for the
claimant has urged that the monthly salary determined by the Tribunal
deserves to be increased. This Court is of the opinion that there can be
no increase as the appellant's stand was that he was getting salary of
Rs.1205/- per month, which could not be established.
7. Besides, the said amount, as has been held in Raj Kumar's
case (supra), a nominal amount is awarded under the head of loss of
amenities, which is determined at Rs.25,000/-. The Tribunal has
awarded a multiplier of 16 which deserves to be enhanced and is
increased to 18 in view of the judgment of the Supreme Court in
Sarla Verma Versus Delhi Transport Corporation (2009) 6 SCC
121. Another increase @ 40% is granted to the claimant on account of
3 of 4
Neutral Citation No:=2024:PHHC:048179
FAO-1128-1993 (O&M) -4-
future prospects.
8. Without interfering with the rate of interest as awarded by
the Tribunal or the direction regarding recovery from the respondents,
the compensation amount is ordered to be enhanced as indicated in
preceding paragraphs and the award of the Tribunal is modified
accordingly.
9. Appeal is disposed of.
10. Pending application(s), if any, is/are disposed of.
09.04.2024 (SUVIR SEHGAL)
pooja saini JUDGE
Whether Speaking/Reasoned Yes/No
Whether Reportable Yes/No
4 of 4
