High Court of Punjab and Haryana, Chandigarh
Case Law Search
BAJ SINGH v. GENERAL MANAGER PUNJAB ROADWAYS - XOBJ-16-cii-1988  RD-P&H 4751 (25 July 2006)
FAO No.260 of 1987 1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH
CASE NO.: Cross-Objections No.16-CII of 1988 & FAO No.260 of 1987
DATE OF DECISION: July 12, 2006
BAJ SINGH ...APPELLANT
GENERAL MANAGER PUNJAB ROADWAYS ...RESPONDENTS AND OTHERS
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ASHUTOSH MOHUNTA.
PRESENT: MR. V.K. KATARIA, ADVOCATE FOR THE APPELLANT.
MR. C.M. MUNJAL, SR. ADDL.A.G., PUNJAB.
MR. NAVKIRAN SINGH, ADVOCATE
FOR RESPONDENT NO.3.
ASHUTOSH MOHUNTA, J. (ORAL)
The cross-objections No.16-CII of 1988 filed by respondent No.3 are dismissed.
The appellant Baj Singh has filed the present appeal against the judgement of Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Faridkot (for short 'the Tribunal') dated 3.1.1987, by which a compensation of Rs.9000/- alongwith 12% interest was awarded on account of the appellant's having received injuries in a motor accident.
Cross-Objections No.16-CII of 1988 &
FAO No.260 of 1987 2
It is the case of the claimant that on 30.10.1985, he was going from Gidderbaha to Muktsar on a scooter bearing No.PBK 4203 and when he reached village Rakhala around noon time, a Punjab Roadways bus bearing No.PBM 6236 came from the opposite direction at a very high speed and struck against the scooter which the appellant was driving. As a result of the accident, the appellant received multiple injuries including fracture of the right leg under the knee. A compensation of Rs.30,000/- in all was claimed by the appellant. The Tribunal found that the accident took place because of the rash and negligent driving of Shamsher Singh, who was the driver of the Punjab Roadways bus. As far as the quantum of compensation is concerned, it was claimed by the appellant that he was earning Rs.1000/- per month as he was a practicing advocate at Faridkot.
And because he remained incapacitated for a period of four months, an amount of Rs.2300/- was claimed on account of medical expenses. Another amount of Rs.5000/- was claimed for pain and suffering.
The Tribunal after taking all the facts into consideration, awarded a sum of Rs.9000/- as compensation to the appellant.
Mr. Kataria, contends that the appellant remained out of job for a period of four months and he had incurred a lot of medical expenses and also pain and suffering, therefore, the amount is liable to be enhanced.
After going through the entire evidence I am of the Cross-Objections No.16-CII of 1988 &
FAO No.260 of 1987 3
considered opinion that the appellant is entitled to Rs.4000/- on account of his having not been able to attend the Courts. The appellant is also awarded a sum of Rs.2300/- on account of treatment and medical expenses and further a sum of Rs.5000/- is awarded on account of pain and suffering. I also award a sum of Rs.2000/- on account of special diet to the appellant.
Thus, the appellant is held entitled to a total compensation of Rs.13,300/-.
He shall also be entitled to interest as awarded by the Tribunal.
All the respondents are held liable to pay the amount jointly and severally.
Appeal disposed of.
July 12, 2006 (ASHUTOSH MOHUNTA)
Double Click on any word for its dictionary meaning or to get reference material on it.