MANOJ SINGH vs GHADU MAL & ORS

Judgment text excerpt

$~16 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % Date of decision: 28th January 2026 + MAC.APP. 1031/2013 & CM APPL. 61646/2024 MANOJ SINGH .....Appellant Through: Mr. Shrey Chathly, Adv. versus GHADU MAL & ORS .....Respondents Through: Mr. Pankaj Seth and Ms. Shruti Jain, Advs. for R-3. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANISH DAYAL JUDGMENT ANISH DAYAL, J: (ORAL) 1. This appeal has been filed seeking enhancement of the compensation awarded by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal (‘MACT’) in Petition No.630/2010 by the claimant in respect of the accident which occurred on 05 th November 2010, where the appellant was riding a bicycle and was hit from behind by a motorcycle which was being driven rashly and negligently by respondent no.1. As a result of the accident, claimant was hospitalized and later assessed to have suffered 50% permanent disability due to cervical spine injury. 2. Income of claimant was assessed on minimum wages. Though, the appellant had claimed that he was working as a plumber; however, he was Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed MAC.APP. 1031/2013 1 of 9 By:MANISH KUMAR Signing Date:05.02.2026 15:33:18 unable to file any proof of employment on record. 3. The appeal has been preferred essentially on the ground that the functional disability ought to have been considered at 100%. 4. The assessment of permanent disability went through a division in the context of the following sequence of events: (i) Dr. A.K. Singh, examined as PW-2 before the MACT on behalf of the Medical Board, stated during his cross-examination that the opinion given for disability certificate could only be given after seeking opinion of a neurologist as well as that of an orthopaedic, and neurologist was not a Member of the Board at the relevant time. Moreover, the Board had not got X-