Fao No.1522 of 2011 (Oandm) Vs. Vijay Kumar and Others - Court Judgment

SooperKanoon Citationsooperkanoon.com/1071740
CourtPunjab and Haryana High Court
Decided OnDec-05-2012
AppellantFao No.1522 of 2011 (Oandm)
RespondentVijay Kumar and Others
Excerpt:
fao no.1522 o”1. in the high court of punjab & haryana at chandigarh. fao no.1522 of 2011 (o&m) date of decision:5. 12.2012 balbir singh ...appellant versus vijay kumar and others ...respondents coram: hon'ble mr.justice rajan gupta present: mr.b.s.tewatia, advocate, for the appellant. mr.aseem aggarwal, advocate for respondent- insurance company. rajan gupta, j (oral) present appeal is directed against the award passed by the tribunal granting compensation to the tune of rs.32,530/- to the injured (appellant) as it came to the conclusion that accident was caused due to rash and negligent driving of the offending vehicle. the award has been impugned on the ground that compensation is assessed on the lower side. learned counsel for the appellant has argued that adequate compensation has not been granted. expenses incurred by the injured for special diet, transportation and attendant were not taken into consideration. learned counsel for insurance company has, however, vehemently opposed the plea. he submits that compensation granted is totally in accordance with the parameters laid down. i have heard learned counsel for the parties and given careful fao no.1522 o”2. thought to the facts of the case. it is evident that claim was lodged on the ground that appellant balbir singh suffered injuries in an accident which had occurred on 28.10.2005 while he was proceeding on his motor cycle. the car driven in a rash and negligent manner, struck against his motor cycle. this resulted in certain injuries for which appellant had to be treated at a hospital at faridabad. after examining the evidence tribunal held that accident was caused due to rash and negligent driving by driver of the offending car. considering the bills of medicines produced and proved by the claimant, tribunal granted compensation to the tune of rs.32,530/-. i find no infirmity with the award passed by the tribunal. there is no scope of enhancement of compensation. appeal is without any merit and is hereby dismissed. (rajan gupta) judge 5 12.2012. 'rajpal'
Judgment:

FAO No.1522 o”

1. IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH.

FAO No.1522 of 2011 (O&M) Date of decision:

5. 12.2012 Balbir Singh ...Appellant Versus Vijay Kumar and others ...Respondents CORAM: HON'BLE Mr.JUSTICE RAJAN GUPTA Present: Mr.B.S.Tewatia, Advocate, for the appellant.

Mr.Aseem Aggarwal, Advocate for respondent- Insurance company.

Rajan Gupta, J (oral) Present appeal is directed against the award passed by the tribunal granting compensation to the tune of Rs.32,530/- to the injured (appellant) as it came to the conclusion that accident was caused due to rash and negligent driving of the offending vehicle.

The award has been impugned on the ground that compensation is assessed on the lower side.

Learned counsel for the appellant has argued that adequate compensation has not been granted.

Expenses incurred by the injured for special diet, transportation and attendant were not taken into consideration.

Learned counsel for insurance company has, however, vehemently opposed the plea.

He submits that compensation granted is totally in accordance with the parameters laid down.

I have heard learned counsel for the parties and given careful FAO No.1522 o”

2. thought to the facts of the case.

It is evident that claim was lodged on the ground that appellant Balbir Singh suffered injuries in an accident which had occurred on 28.10.2005 while he was proceeding on his motor cycle.

The car driven in a rash and negligent manner, struck against his motor cycle.

This resulted in certain injuries for which appellant had to be treated at a hospital at Faridabad.

After examining the evidence tribunal held that accident was caused due to rash and negligent driving by driver of the offending car.

Considering the bills of medicines produced and proved by the claimant, tribunal granted compensation to the tune of Rs.32,530/-.

I find no infirmity with the award passed by the tribunal.

There is no scope of enhancement of compensation.

Appeal is without any merit and is hereby dismissed.

(RAJAN GUPTA) JUDGE 5 12.2012.

'rajpal'