The High Court of Punjab and Haryana affirms that where a government servant claimant suffers no loss of salary, no amount needs to be added toward “future prospects” in awarding motor accident compensation, thereby upholding settled precedent. This serves as binding authority within the State and persuasive authority elsewhere for similarly situated government employees.
Summary
| Category | Data |
|---|---|
| Case Name | FAO/1780/2021 of KHEM CHAND Vs GURPREET SINGH @ GURMEET SINGH AND OTHERS |
| CNR | PHHC010751932021 |
| Date of Registration | 08-10-2021 |
| Decision Date | 31-10-2025 |
| Disposal Nature | DISMISSED |
| Judgment Author | MR. JUSTICE DEEPAK GUPTA |
| Court | High Court of Punjab and Haryana |
| Precedent Value | Binding within jurisdiction; persuasive elsewhere |
| Type of Law | Motor Accident Claims / Compensation |
| Questions of Law | Whether “future prospects” must be added in compensation if a government servant suffered no salary loss. |
| Ratio Decidendi |
The court held that where the claimant is in government service and did not suffer any actual loss of salary due to the accident, nothing needs to be added to compensation towards “future prospects.” The only ground urged for enhancement was the omission of future prospects, but the factual record showed no salary loss. Hence, the Tribunal’s decision was upheld. |
| Facts as Summarised by the Court |
The appellant (Khem Chand), a government employee, sought enhancement of compensation on the ground that “future prospects” were not added. The paper book showed that he did not suffer any loss of salary due to the accident. The Tribunal had not provided for future prospects, and the High Court found no ground for enhancement. |
Practical Impact
| Category | Impact |
|---|---|
| Binding On | All subordinate courts within Punjab & Haryana |
| Persuasive For | Other High Courts, possibly Supreme Court |
| Follows | Affirms settled law that “future prospects” are not automatically added for government employees with no loss |
What’s New / What Lawyers Should Note
- Reiterates that “future prospects” are not mandatory in all cases; only where actual loss is established.
- Clarifies that government servant claimants with no loss of salary are not entitled to additional compensation under “future prospects.”
- Lawyers should carefully examine the employment status and proof of loss before seeking enhancement on future prospects.
- Reinforces the evidentiary requirement — a mere claim is insufficient if records show no salary loss.
Summary of Legal Reasoning
- The court considered the single ground raised by the appellant — exclusion of “future prospects” in the compensation calculation.
- On review of the record, it found that the claimant, being a government servant, did not suffer any salary loss due to the accident.
- Held that, in such circumstances, nothing is required to be awarded under the head “future prospects.”
- The Tribunal’s compensation award was found proper and justified on these grounds, leading to the dismissal of the appeal.
Arguments by the Parties
Petitioner
- Sought enhancement of compensation on the ground that “future prospects” were not factored into the award.
Factual Background
The appellant, Khem Chand, a government employee, was awarded compensation by the Tribunal following a motor accident. Dissatisfied, he appealed for enhancement, arguing that no sum had been added for “future prospects.” The record showed he continued in government service and had not suffered any loss of salary. The High Court reviewed the paper book and dismissed his appeal.
Statutory Analysis
- The judgment considered the principles relating to the calculation of compensation in motor accident claims, specifically regarding addition towards “future prospects.”
- No express statutory provisions were interpreted in detail; application was based on settled legal principles that such additions apply only if actual salary loss is proven.
Procedural Innovations
The judgment did not create any procedural innovations; it followed settled procedure for appeal disposal in motor accident claim matters.
Alert Indicators
- ✔ Precedent Followed – Existing law regarding “future prospects” addition only upon actual loss is affirmed.