Manohar Lal Sahani Vs. Sohan Lal and Others - Court Judgment

FAO No.757 of 2005 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH FAO No.757 of 2005 (O&M) DECIDED ON : 11.02.2014 Manohar Lal Sahani ...Appellant-Claimant versus Sohan Lal and others ...Respondents CORAM : HON'BLE Mr.JUSTICE AJAY TEWARI Present : Mr.Yogesh Saini, Advocate for the appellant.

Mr.R.K.Bashamboo, Advocate for respondent No.3.

***** 1.

Whether Reporters of Local Newspapers may be allowed to see the judgment?.

2.

To be referred to the Reporters or not?.

3.

Whether the judgment should be reported in the Digest?.

AJAY TEWARI, J.

(ORAL) Learned counsel for the appellant has supplied a complete copy of paper book and the same is taken on record.

Learned counsel for the parties states that since the liability is not disputed service upon respondents No.1,2,4,5 and 6 may be exempted.

Allowed as prayed for.

This appeal has been filed by the appellant-claimant for enhancement of compensation against the award dated 20.11.2004, passed by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Panipat.

The brief facts of this case are that on 7.04.2002 the Manoj Kumar 2014.03.12 09:14 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document FAO No.757 of 2005 2 claimant accompanied by Sham Sunder Kohli respondent and Bal Mukand Shashtri was coming back to Delhi from Jallandhar in car bearing registration No.DL-9CC-2007, being driven by Sohan Lal respondent.

When at about 10.00 P.M.that vehicle reached near village Jhatipur a combine harvester bearing registration No.PB- 12B/4505 emerged from the side of a hotel and driver of their car dashed against the harvester and which was being driven in a rash and negligent manner.

It is further the case of the claimant that he alongwith Bal Mukand Shashtri was asking Sohan Lal respondent to drive his vehicle in a proper manner but without any effect.

Due to the accident, the claimant received serious and multiple injuries on various parts of his body including dislocation of left hip.

He was taken to the hospital of Dr.

Prem at Panipat and wherefrom he was shifted to Sir Ganga Ram Hospital, Delhi.

The other occupants of the ill-fated vehicle also received serious and multiple injuries on the various parts of their bodies.

The Tribunal has awarded total compensation of ` 3,95,598/- alongwith conditional interest 6% P.A.i.e.`25,000/- for pain and suffering and special diet `30,651/- + `1,94,947/- for medical expenses, `18,000/- for follow up treatment, `27,000/- for medical attendant and `1 lac for permanent disability.

Learned counsel for the appellant has argued that the appellant has suffered 55% disability and consequently he should have been granted ` 1,10,000/- as per Piara Singh v.

Satpal Kumar and otheRs.reported as 2006(4) R.C.R.(Civil) 546.

I accept this argument and grant `10,000/- more on account of permanent disability.

Manoj Kumar 2014.03.12 09:14 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document FAO No.757 of 2005 3 Learned counsel for the appellant has further argued that keeping in view the nature of permanent disability i.e.55% disability on the hip, the amount of ` 25,000/- granted on account of pain and suffering is highly inadequate.

I find that this is indeed so.

I further grant `50,000/- more towards pain and suffering.

Learned counsel for the appellant has further argued that the conditional interest @ 6% is highly inadequate.

I find myself in agreement with the learned counsel for the appellant.

I further hold that the enhanced amount shall be paid along with interest @ 8% p.a.from the date of filing of the claim petition till the date of realization.

The management would be as per the direction of the Tribunal.

The appeal is allowed in the above terms and the award is modified accordingly.

Since the main case has been decided, the pending civil miscellaneous application, if any, also stands disposed of.

February 11, 2014 (AJAY TEWARI) Manoj Bhutani JUDGE Manoj Kumar 2014.03.12 09:14 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document