[Cites 0, Cited by 0]
Punjab-Haryana High Court
Abdul Majid vs Sule Khan & Ors on 21 January, 2026
FAO No.873 of 2002 (O&M) -1-
S. No.220
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA
AT CHANDIGARH
****
FAO No.873 of 2002 (O&M)
Date of Decision:21.01.2026
Abdul Majid .....Appellant
Vs.
Sule Khan and others .....Respondents
CORAM:- HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE YASHVIR SINGH RATHOR
Present:- Mr. Ashish Gupta, Advocate for the appellant.
Mr. Aseem Aggarwal, Advocate for respondent No.3.
Respondents No.1 and 2 already ex parte before the Tribunal.
****
Yashvir Singh Rathor, J. (Oral)
CM No.3690-CII of 2002
This is an application for condonatin of delay of 1309 days in filing
the appeal.
For the reasons mentioned in the application, the same is allowed and
delay of 1309 days in filing the appeal is condoned.
FAO No.873 of 2002 (O&M)
1. This appeal has been instituted against the award dated 18.12.1997
for enhancement of compensation vide which a sum of Rs.20,000/- has been
awarded to the petitioner on account of injuries suffered by him in a motor
vehicular accident in a vehicle being driven by respondent No.1 in a rash and
negligent manner which was owned by respondent No.2 and insured with
respondent No.3.
1 of 5
FAO No.873 of 2002 (O&M) -2-
2. As per version of appellant, accident took place on 28.10.1995 at
08.00 a.m., when he was carrying 8 to 10 school children in his tonga to
Ferozepur Jhirka. When they reached a little ahead of Maholi towards Feorzepur
Jhirka, truck bearing registration No.RJ-02-G/1175 came from the opposite side in
a rash and negligent manner at a high speed and hit in his tonga which was being
plied on the left side of the road. Several children fell from the tonga and suffered
injuries. Appellant also suffered injuries on account of the accident. He was
taken to the hospital and he had spent Rs.25,000/- on his treatment. A sum of
Rs.5,000/- was spent for the treatment of his mare. He also suffered great
physical and mental agony and claimed compensation to the extent of Rs.5 lakhs.
3. Respondents No.1 and 2 initially filed written statement but
thereafter, they absented and were proceeded ex parte vide order dated
25.09.1997. Respondent No.3 - The New India Assurance Co. Ltd. also filed
separate written statement and opposed the petition on the ground of cause of
action.
4. Follwoing issues were framed by the Tribunal as under:-
"1) Whether the accident in question resulting in injuries to the
petitioner was caused due to rash and negligent driving of vehicle
No.RJ-02-G-1175 by respondent No.1? OPP
2) What amount of compensation, the petitioners are entitled to
recover and against whom?OPP
3) Relief."
5. Both the parties led their respective evidence and after hearing the
parties, learned Tribunal held that accident in question had taken place due to rash
and negligent driving on the part of respondent No.1 while driving the offending
2 of 5
FAO No.873 of 2002 (O&M) -3-
vehicle. Under Issue No.2, it was held that appellant had suffered 15% permanent
disability on account of injury in his ankle as well as fractures and he was
awarded a sum of Rs.15,000/- towards pain and sufferings and for permanent
disability. A sum of Rs.5,000/- was also awarded for damage to his tonga and
injuries to the mare.
6. Feeling aggrieved, the present appeal has been filed by the claimant
for enhancement of compensation awarded by the Tribunal. No notice is required
to be issued to respondents No.1 and 2 as they were already ex parte before the
Tribunal.
7. At the very outset, it is pertinent to mention that record of the
Tribunal has got burnt and the present appeal shall be decided on the basis of facts
and findings recorded in the main award.
8. It is not in dispute that no appeal has been preferred by the owner as
well as driver of the offending vehicle challenging the finding on Issue No.1. The
Insurance Company had filed one appeal bearing FAO No.500 of 1998 against the
same award which has already been disposed of vide judgment dated 16.09.2010
and finding on Issue No.1 has not been varied or set aside. However, Insurance
Company has been given the liberty to recover the awarded amount from the
insured/ owner on account of breach of terms and conditions of the insurance
policy. As such, there is no necessity to go into the finding on Issue No.1 as same
has not been assailed by the owner-cum-driver.
9. From the material on file, it is established that petitioner had suffered
fracture in his leg and has suffered 15% permanent disability in relation to the
ankle. Petitioner has been awarded only a sum of Rs.15,000/- towards pain and
sufferings and on account of permanent disability suffered by him. However, it is
3 of 5
FAO No.873 of 2002 (O&M) -4-
well settled that pain component in such type of injuries is enormous and
petitioner is certainly entitled to enhanced amount of compensation on account of
pain and sufferings as well as permanent disability suffered by him and same is
enhanced to Rs.25,000/-.
10. However, the compensation of Rs.5,000/- awarded to him for damage
to his tonga and injuries suffered by the mare shall remain the same and does not
call for any interference.
11. Petitioner had also claimed a sum of Rs.15,000/- towards medical
expenses but no amount was granted to him as no bills were proved. However,
this Court cannot loose sight of the fact that petitioner had suffered fracture in his
ankle and some amount must have been spent by him on his treatment. As such,
some guess work has to be applied in assessing the compensation on account of
the expenses incurred on the treatment. Accordingly, petitioner is held entitled to
a sum of Rs.5,000/- towards treatment expenses.
12. It must have taken at least three months for the injuries/ fractures to
heal and during this period, appellant- claimant would not have been able to do
any job and by considering his wages/ income to be Rs.1700/- per month, he is
awarded a sum of Rs.5000/- towards loss of income.
13. During this period, he must have also spent some amount on special
diet, on transportation and in engaging an attendant but no compensation has
been awarded by the Tribunal under this head. Accordingly, he is also awarded a
sum of Rs.5,000/- under this head.
14. The total compensation payable to the appellant is accordingly
assessed as under:-
4 of 5
FAO No.873 of 2002 (O&M) -5-
S.No. Under Head By the Tribunal By High Court
1. Pain and sufferings as well as Rs.15,000/- Rs.25,000/-
permanent disability
2. Damage to Tonga and injuries Rs.5,000/- Rs.5,000/-
suffered by mare
3. Treatment expenses Nil Rs.5,000/-
4. Loss of income Nil Rs.5000/-
5. Special diet, on transportation Nil Rs.5,000/-
and in engaging an attendant
Total compensation Rs.20,000/- Rs.45,000/-
15. Accordingly, enhanced compensation is assessed as Rs.25,000/- and
appellant is entitled to recover the same along with interest @ 9% from the date of
filing of claim petition till realisation. However, no interest shall be payable for a
period of 1309 days as appeal was filed after a long delay. This Court while
deciding FAO No.500 of 1998, has held that Insurance Company is not liable to
pay the compensation and as such, the liability of respondents No.1 and 2 shall be
joint and several. However, respondent No.3 shall first of all satisfy the award
and pay the enhanced compensation and thereafter, it shall have a right to recover
the awarded amount from the owner/ insured without filing a separate suit along
with interest @ 6% per annum from the date of deposit till realisation. No order
as to costs. The entire of compensation be paid to the petitioner in cash.
(Yashvir Singh Rathor)
Judge
January 21, 2026
renu
Whether Speaking/reasoned Yes/No
Whether Reportable Yes/No
5 of 5
