F.A.O.No. 2282 of 2006. 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH. F.A.O.No. 2282 of 2006. Date of Decision :7.1.09 Harminder Singh Appellant. VERSUS Ashwani Mehta and others Respondents. CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE JORA SINGH. --- Present:- Mr.B.P.S.Virk Advocate, for the appellant. Mr.G.S.Jawal,Advocate, for Respondent Nos. 1 and 2. Mr.Gopal Mittal, Advocate, assisted by Mr.Baljit Singh, Deputy Manager, for United India Insurance Company. --- 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? JORA SINGH,J. Harminder Singh has filed this appeal against the Award dated 5.12.2005 passed by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Ropar in MACT Case No. 18 of 5.2.2003, whereby claim petition filed by him was accepted and Rs.1,25000/- as compensation on account of injuries suffered in road side accident was awarded. On 26.12.2002 Harminder Singh appellant along F.A.O.No. 2282 of 2006. 2 with his wife Baljit Kaur had left their house on their Motor Cycle No. PB-65-B/2958 and was going towards Chandigarh side. Motor Cycle was being driven by Harminder Singh and Baljit Kaur was the pillion rider. Harminder Singh along with his wife was on the main road of Phase- XI, Mohali. In the meantime, Indica Car No. CH-03-J/4534 came at a very high speed from the opposite side . Car was being driven rashly and negligently by respondent No.1 and struck the same against the Motor Cycle of the appellant. In the accident, appellant received multiple grievous injuries and was shifted to PGI, Chandigarh where he remained admitted for about one month. Rs.1,50,000/- was spent for medicine; Rs.50,000/- on special diet and Rs.25,000/- on transportation. A servant was also engaged to attend the appellant. For which Rs.2000/- P.M. was being paid to the servant. Respondents No. 1 and 2 filed joint written statement and contested the claim petition inter alia, on the ground that there was no accident. Respondent No.3 filed separate written statement by pleading that driver of the Indica car was not holding a valid and effective driving licence. The concerned F.A.O.No. 2283 of 2006 has been disposed of on 6.1.2009 in Lok Adalat. From the pleadings of the parties, following issued were framed:- 1. Whether Harminder Singh had received injuries in accident dated 26.12.2002 at about 1.15 P.M. F.A.O.No. 2282 of 2006. 3 in the area of Phase-XI, Mohali caused by Ashwani Mehta respondent No.1 while driving Indica Car No. CH-03-J/4534 rashly and negligently ?OPP 2. Whether respondent No.1 was not having a valid driving licence at the time of accident?OPR 3. Is the petition not maintainable ?OPR 4. Whether the petition is bad for non-joinder of necessary parties?OPR 5. To what amount of compensation, the claimants is entitled to recover ? OPR 6. Relief. Evidence was led by both the parties. After hearing learned counsel for the parties and evidence on the file, claim petition was accepted and Rs.1,25,000/- was awarded as compensation payable to the appellant on account of injuries suffered in the road side accident. Feeling aggrieved against the Award dated 5.12.2005, appeal was preferred by Harminder Singh. Notice was issued to the respondents. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and have gone through the evidence on the file very carefully and thoroughly. Learned counsel for the appellant argued that the accident was due to rash and negligent driving of Indica Car No. CH-03-J/4534 by its driver-respondent No.1 which was F.A.O.No. 2282 of 2006. 4 being driven rashly and negligently. Against the finding of the Ld. Tribunal qua accident, no appeal by the respondents was filed that means the finding of the learned Tribunal has attained finality but it is disputed that adequate compensation was not awarded. Appellant remained admitted in PGI, Chandigarh for one month and had spent Rs.80000/- as per bills Ex.P-1 to P-97, but only Rs.50,000/- was awarded. Rs.25000/- was awarded under the head pains and sufferings. Rs.10,000/- on account of employment of attendant and convenience charges and Rs.40,000/- under other heads. When appellant had spent Rs.80,000/- on medicines, then there was no idea to award Rs.50,000/- as compensation. Compensation payable under the head pains and sufferings is on the lower side. Learned counsel for the appellant requested to enhance the compensation. Learned counsel for the Insurance Company argued that after going through the evidence on the file, compensation was awarded. Evidence on the file shows that accident was due to rash and negligent driving of Indica Car No. CH-03-J/4534 by respondent No.1. Car was being driven rashly and negligently by respondent No.1 and in the accident, appellant received injuries. While discussing issue No.1, Tribunal opined that the accident was due to rash and negligent driving of Indica Car by its driver respondent No.1. Against the finding of learned Tribunal under issue No.1, no appeal F.A.O.No. 2282 of 2006. 5 was filed by the respondents. So, finding of the Tribunal qua accident has attained finality. Next question is whether adequate compensation was awarded to the appellant on account of injuries suffered in road side accident. Ex.:P-1 to Ex.P-97 are the medical bills. Appellant had spent Rs.80,000/- on his treatment but without recording any reason by the Tribunal, only Rs.50,000/-was awarded. When appellant had spent Rs.80,000/- then he should have been awarded Rs.80,000/- as compensation. Appellant remained admitted in the PGI for about one month. Ex.P-101 is the disability certificate. Due to admission in the PGI, appellant had suffered physically as well as mentally. On account of injuries by remaining in hospital, Rs. 25000/- was given under the head pain and suffering. According to the disability certificate Ex.P-101, disability was 74%, but the learned Tribunal had awarded Rs.40,000/-. In 2008(2) RCR (Civil) 103 Ram Kiran Goyal Vs. Sub Divisional Engineer, Mechanicdal and others, it was held by the Division Bench of this Court that compensation be awarded at the rate of Rs.2000/- for every 1% disability. As per disability certificate, Rs.1,48,000/- should have been awarded. In view of all discussed above, Insurance Company is directed to pay enhanced compensation of Rs.1,38,000/- with interest at the rate of 9% per annum as awarded by the learned Tribunal from the date of petition till realization. F.A.O.No. 2282 of 2006. 6 Liability to pay compensation would remain the same as ordered by the Tribunal. Award be modified accordingly. Petition stands disposed of. 7.1.09 (JORA SINGH) Anoop JUDGE