Ashok Kumar vs Hardam Singh & Ors

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA
AT CHANDIGARH
256 FAO-3457-2005 (O&M)
Reserved on:04.11.2026
Pronounced on: 13.11.2026
ASHOK KUMAR ...APPELLANT
VERSUS
HARDAM AND OTHERS ...RESPONDENTS
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PARMOD GOYAL
Present: None for appellant.
Mr. Lalit Garg, Advocate
for respondent No.3-Insurance Company.
*
PARMOD GOYAL, J.
Present appeal has been preferred by appellant-claimant being
aggrieved by impugned award dated 19.05.2005 passed by learned Motor
Accident Claims Tribunal, Kurukshetra (hereinafter referred to as
‘ Tribunal ’), for enhancement in compensation of Rs.1,60,000/- awarded to
him on account of injuries suffered by him in motor vehicular accident dated
11.04.2003, allegedly caused due to rash and negligent driving of
respondent-driver while driving car bearing registration No.CH-03F-2524
(hereinafter referred to as ‘ offending vehicle ’).
2. Since in the present appeal the only issue raised by the
appellants-claimants is with regard to the quantum of compensation and no
appeal or cross-objection has been preferred by any of the respondents to
challenge findings of learned Tribunal as regards to rash and negligent
driving of offending vehicle by respondent-driver, therefore, the detailed
facts regarding the manner of accident are not being noticed herein for the
sake of brevity.
SUNIL CHANDER
2026.11.13 15:46
I attest to the accuracy and
integrity of this document

FAO-3457-2005 (O&M) -2-
3. In the present case, learned Tribunal had awarded the following
compensation to appellant-claimant:
Medical Expenses Rs.12,000/-
per month
Disability at 68% Rs.1,25,000/-
Pain & Suffering Rs.10,000/-
Loss of Income Rs.10,000/-
Conveyance charges Rs.3,000/-
Total compensation awarded Rs.1,60,000/-
4. Learned counsel for the appellant-claimant has sought
enhancement in compensation on the following grounds that :
●
Learned Tribunal had erred in not granting
compensation on the basis of functional disability (as
permanent disability is 68%);
●
Learned Tribunal has erred in not taking the income of
appellant-claimant as was pleaded by the appellant-
claimant;
●
Future prospects were not added while determining loss
of earning capacity. Future prospects to the extent 40 %
of monthly income needs to be added as appellant-
claimant was 43 years of age at the time of accident.
●
Appropriate multiplier was not applied by learned
Tribunal;
●
Compensation for loss of future prospects and future
amenities, for loss of income during treatment, and for
future medical expenses, for pain and sufferings, special
diet, transportation and attendant charges etc has not
been granted to which appellant-claimant is entitled to;
and
SUNIL CHANDER
2026.11.13 15:46
I attest to the accuracy and
integrity of this document

FAO-3457-2005 (O&M) -3-
●
Enhancement of compensation towards medical
expenses is warranted being insufficient in view of
nature of injuries, nature of treatment and period of
hospitalisation.
5. In order to prove nature of injuries, nature of treatment, period
of treatment, extent of permanent disability and loss suffered on account of
treatment and under non-pecuniary heads, appellant-claimant had duly
examined Dr. Gautam Biswas as PW-7, who stated that after the accident
appellant-claimant was admitted in emergency Department of PGIMER,
Chandigarh. PW-7 further stated that the appellant-claimant was admitted in
the hospital with facial laceration, facial fracture, eye injury and injury on
the right elbow. The appellant-claimant was operated for plastic surgery for
facial fracture and was discharged on 21.04.2003. PW-7 also proved injury
report of the appellant-claimant as Ex.P5. As per the record appellant-
claimant had sustained loss of right eye and fracture of arm bone (right)
medial epicondyle. He also proved the eye examination report as Ex.P6,
orthopaedic examination report for fracture as Ex.P7 and copy of OPD card.
Ex.P19 is the discharge and follow up card of the appellant-claimant issued
by PGIMER, Chandigarh where he was shown to have remained admitted
from 11.04.2003 to 21.04.2003. It was further asserted that on account of
injuries, appellant-claimant had suffered disability to the extent of 68%. Dr.
Dalbir Singh while appearing as PW-1, stated that the appellant-claimant had
suffered disability to the extent of 68% attributed to shifting of midline and
deformity of face at left mandibular region and restriction of opening TMJ
by 30% and placed on record disability certificate of appellant-claimant as
ExP1. It is further proved that the appellant-claimant suffered retinal
SUNIL CHANDER
2026.11.13 15:46
I attest to the accuracy and
integrity of this document

FAO-3457-2005 (O&M) -4-
degeneration of right eye by 30% as well as by ENT surgeon due to loss of
pinna of ear along with tragus by 8%. PW4-Dr. S.D. Arora, medico legally
examined the appellant-claimant at General hospital, Ambala City and
proved copy of MLR ExP2. The appellant-claimant proved medical bills
ExP9 to ExP17 amounting to Rs.11,713/-.
6. From the evidence so placed before learned Tribunal, it stands
proved beyond doubt that appellant-claimant had suffered grievous injuries,
result of which was permanent disability to the extent of 68%.
7. In present case, appellant-claimant had claimed that he was 43
years old at the time of accident and was running a confectionery (Halwai)
shop earning Rs.6,000/- to Rs.7,000/- per month. Therefore, the nature and
extent of permanent disability in view of shifting of midline and deformity
of face at left mandibular region and restriction of opening TMJ by 30%
would lead to loss of future earning capacity and accordingly functional
disability is taken as 68%. In absence of any material/reliable to conclude
income of injured, same is taken as Rs.2,400/- per month i.e. minimum
wages payable to skilled worker in the year 2003 as injured was working as
Halwai. Appellant-claimant was stated to be aged 43 years at the time of
accident to which there is no rebuttal. Therefore, future prospects to the
extent of 25% for the purposes of determining loss of earning capacity also
needs to be added in view of judgment passed by Hon'ble Supreme Court in
National Insurance Company Ltd. Vs. Pranay Sethi and Ors. , 2017 (16)
SCC 680. Multiplier of ‘14’ shall be applicable in view of judgment passed
by Hon’ble Supreme Court in Smt. Sarla Verma & Ors. Vs. Delhi
Transport Corporation & Anr. , 2009(6) SCC 121.
SUNIL CHANDER
2026.11.13 15:46
I attest to the accuracy and
integrity of this document

FAO-3457-2005 (O&M) -5-
8. Accordingly, loss of earning capacity payable to injured-
appellant-claimant has to be determined by taking functional disability
equivalent to 68% after taking monthly income of the injured to be
Rs.2,400/- , by adding future prospects to the extent of 25% and by applying
multiplier of ‘14’ .
9. Appellant-claimant was granted compensation of Rs.10,000/-
for pain and sufferings , which keeping in view nature of injuries, nature of
treatment, permanent disability, period of hospitalization is totally
insufficient and same is accordingly enhanced to Rs . 50,000 /-. Since
appellant-claimant had suffered permanent disability to the extent of 68%,
he would have been deprived of future amenities of life as well as future
prospects of life, therefore, he shall be entitled to compensation for loss of
future prospects and future amenities of life which is quantified at
Rs.1,00,000/- . Appellant-claimant is also entitled to consolidated
compensation of Rs.25,000/- for medical expenses, transportation, special
diet and attendant charges .
10. Appellant-claimant must have also suffered loss of income for
the time he was under treatment and keeping in view period of
hospitalization and nature of injuries, it is made out that appellant-claimant
must have remained out of work for at least 09 months. Accordingly,
compensation for loss of income during treatment is assessed as Rs . 21,600 /-
(Rs.2,400/- X 9). Since, appellant-claimant has not placed any material to
show the future medical expenses, therefore, he is not entitled to any
compensation under the head future medical expenses. Since no evidence
justifying future medical expenses has been adduced, therefore, no
SUNIL CHANDER
2026.11.13 15:46
I attest to the accuracy and
integrity of this document

FAO-3457-2005 (O&M) -6-
compensation is payable under future medical expenses.
11. Re-worked compensation payable to appellant-claimant is
as under:-
Income Rs.2,400/- Rs.2,400/-
per month per month
Future prospects 25% Rs.3,000/-
(2,400+ 600)
68% Permanent 68% of Rs.3000/- Rs.2,040/-
disability
Multiplier 14 14
Total loss of Rs.2,040/-X 14 X 12 Rs.3,42,720/-
earning capacity
Loss of income Rs.2,400/- X 9 Rs.21,600/-
during treatment
Compensation for
medical expenses,
transportation,
special diet and
attendant charges
Rs.15,000/-
(awarded by Tribunal
for medical expenses
and transportation)
Rs.25,000/-
Compensation for Rs.10,000/- Rs.50,000/-
pain and sufferings (awarded by Tribunal)
Compensation for
loss of future
prospects and
future amenities of
life
Rs.1,00,000/-
Rs.1,60,000/-
Total
compensation
awarded by the
Tribunal
Rs.5,39,320/-
Total
compensation
awarded in appeal
Enhanced Rs.5,39,320/-
compensation (awarded in appeal)
-
Rs.1,60,000/-
(awarded by Tribunal)
Rs.3,79,320/-
12. Appellant-claimant shall also be entitled to interest over
enhanced amount to the extent of 7.5% from the date of filing of claim
petition till its realization. The liability of respondents to pay compensation
shall be as per award.
SUNIL CHANDER
2026.11.13 15:46
I attest to the accuracy and
integrity of this document

FAO-3457-2005 (O&M) -7-
13. Present appeal is allowed in above terms.
14. Pending application(s), if any, stand disposed of.
(PARMOD GOYAL)
JUDGE
13.11.2026
Sunil Chander
Whether speaking/reasoned : Yes/No
Whether reportable : Yes/No
SUNIL CHANDER
2026.11.13 15:46
I attest to the accuracy and
integrity of this document