High Court of Punjab and Haryana, Chandigarh
Case Law Search
Vicky alias Vikas v. Paramjit & Ors - FAO-2600-1998  RD-P&H 1304 (1 March 2006)
Case No. : F.A.O.No.2600 of 1998
Date of Decision : February 22, 2006.
Vicky alias Vikas .... Appellant
Paramjit & others .... Respondents
Coram : Hon'ble Mr.Justice Viney Mittal.
* * *
Present : None for the parties.
JUDGMENT (Oral) :
The injured Vikas alias Vicky is the appellant-claimant before this Court. He wants enhancement in the compensation as awarded by the Tribunal, in its award dated September 11, 1998. On February 24, 1995, the claimant Vikas alias Vicky, who was minor at that point of time, was going along with his father Surinder Kumar. In the meantime, a Maruti Car bearing registration No.DL-2CF-7218, being driven by respondent no.1 Paramjit alias Pammi, came from the side of Sadar Bazar and hit the claimant. As a result of the aforesaid accident, the claimant suffered injuries and his left leg was fractured. It was claimed that he had remained in the hospital from February 24, 1995 till March 29, 1995. Besides the compensation for pain and sufferings suffered by him, the claimant also wanted reimbursement of medical expenses.
The learned Tribunal, on the basis of evidence available on record, found that respondent no.1 Paramjit alias Pammi was indeed rash and negligent in his driving and therefore, the accident in question had taken place because of the aforesaid fact. It was also observed by the Tribunal that the claimant had suffered a fracture in his leg and that he had F.A.O.No.2600 of 1998 : 2 :
to be hospitalised for the aforesaid purpose. Taking into consideration the medical bills and other evidence produced by the claimant, the total claim payable to the claimant was assessed at Rs.15,000/-.
I have gone through the record of the case and have also perused the award of the learned Tribunal.
In my considered view, there is no scope for further enhancement . The entire evidence led by the claimant-appellant had been taken into consideration by the Tribunal. The claimant has not been shown to have suffered any permanent disability.
In view of the aforesaid discussion, there is no merit in the present appeal and the same is, accordingly, dismissed.
February 22, 2006 ( VINEY MITTAL )
Double Click on any word for its dictionary meaning or to get reference material on it.