H.S.BEDI,J - (1.) THIS appeal has been filed by Gurbax Singh-claimant against the judgment of learned Single Judge dated 23.11.2000, claiming higher compensation with respect to the accident in which he had received injuries.
(2.) AS per the facts of the case a tractor-trolley driven by Baldev Singh- respondent met with an accident with a bus belonging to Haryana Roadways being driven by Rupinder Singh on 2.4.1989. Gurbax Singh, appellant who alongwith others happened to be going along on his bicycle was injured in the accident. He, thereupon filed a petition before the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal claiming compensation on account of injuries that he had suffered. The Tribunal while disposing of a bunch of claim petitions arising out of the same accident held that as the claimant-Gurbax Singh had suffered a compound fracture and disability to the extent of 5% and a rod too had been fitted in his right hand and its removal also required operation, he was entitled to a sum of Rs. 2,500/- as compensation. This figure has been enhanced to Rs. 10,000/- by the learned Single Judge. Still dis-satisfied, Gurbax Singh has filed the present Letters Patent Appeal. Mr. V.B. Aggarwal, learned counsel for the appellant-claimant has argued that in view of the finding that the appellant had suffered a compound fracture and an iron rod had been fitted in his right hand and the fact that he was a mechanic by profession, required that the compensation should be suitably enhanced. He has also pointed out that even otherwise, as per Section 140 sub-section (2) of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988, compensation provided under the no fault liability had been fixed at Rs. 12,500/- which amount had been enhanced to Rs. 25,000/- by the amendment of 1994 and the appellant was entitled to at least this amount. He has also relied on Sumitra Devi v. Danesh Kumar, 1997(1) RCR(Civil) 693 (P&H) : (1997-1)115 P.L.R. 403 and Raghbir Singh v. Tilak Raj, 1999(1) RCR(Civil) 177 (P&H) : (1998-3)120 P.L.R. 570, to contend that the amendment of 1994 would be applicable to those matters which were pending in Court a although the accident may have happened prior to the amendment. We find merit in this plea. The judgments clearly support by appellant's case as the accident had taken place on 1989 and proceedings were pending in Court at that time.
(3.) APPLYING the principles aforesaid, we enhance the compensation to Rs. 25,000/- under the no fault liability clause.;