Research › Search › Judgment

Punjab High Court · body

2018 DIGILAW 4333 (PNJ)

Jagdish Chander v. Satish Kumar

2018-11-12

AVNEESH JHINGAN

body2018
JUDGMENT Mr. Avneesh Jhingan, J (Oral) - These are two appeals arising out of award dated 26.03.2014 passed by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Karnal (for brevity ‘the Tribunal’). 2. The brief facts of the case are that on 28.06.2010, Rajinder Kumar alongwith his father Jagdish Chander and his relative Sanjiv Kumar were going to Nissing from Karnal on motorcycle bearing registration No. HR-05Z-6812. The said vehicle was being driven by Sanjiv Kumar. Whey they reached near Desi Wine Shop on Chirao Turning, Dadupur Jungle, Karnal, their motorcycle was hit by rashly and negligently driven Force Trump-15 bearing chassis No. MCIBIAMAZAA00141 and engine No. D0006664. As a result of the impact, the occupants of the Motor Cycle fell down and received injuries. FIR No.406, dated 04.07.2010 was registered at Police Station, Sadar, Karnal. 3. Two claim petitions were filed under Section 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 (for brevity ‘the Act’). The Tribunal, after considering the facts and appreciating the evidence adduced, awarded a compensation of Rs.45,000/- to Rajinder Kumar and Rs.20,000/- to Jagdish Chander. The compensation was to be paid alongwith interest @ 7.5% per annum. The present appeal has been filed for enhancement of compensation. 4. Learned counsel for the appellant contended that the injured persons met with an accident in Karnal. They were admited to Civil Hospital, Karnal from where they were referred to PGI, Chandigarh. The treatment record of PGI, Chandigarh was proved by deposition of Naveen Sharma. He further argued that the amount awarded for pain and suffering, transportation and special diet in both the cases are on the lower side. 5. From the perusal of paper book and relevant documents produced by the appellant, it is evident that there was no permanent disability. The Tribunal has already reimbursed the medical expenses incurred by the appellants. The Tribunal has awarded compensation for loss of income also. 6. Keeping in view the fact that the appellants were referred to PGI, Chandigarh, for which they needed transportation and attendant(s) atleast for the duration they remained admitted in PGI, Chandigarh, the amount awarded by the Tribunal to both the appellants is enhanced by Rs.15,000/- each. 7. It is, however, clarified that while enhancing the amount, the interest to be awarded under Section 171 of the Act has also been considered. 8. The appeals are partly allowed.