FAO No. 1259 of 1992 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA, CHANDIGARH FAO No. 1259 of 1992 Date of decision January 27 , 2011 Master Gurdev Singh ....... Appellant Versus Suba Singh and others ........Respondents CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE K. KANNAN Present:- Ms. Manisha Setia , Advocate for ' Mr. Ashit Malik, Advocate for the appellant. Mr. Vishal Goel , Advocate for Mr. P.K. Gupta, Advocate for respondent No.1. Mr.Kunal Garg, AAG., Haryana for respondent Nos. 2 and 3. **** 1. Whether reporters of local papers may be allowed to see the judgment ? No 2. To be referred to the reporters or not? No 3. Whether the judgment should be reported in the digest?Yes K. Kannan, J (oral). 1. The appeal is for enhancement of compensation for an amputation suffered by a child aged 7 years due to crushed injury on the right foot resulting in amputation of big toe and the second toe. The disability complained was that the child could not play. The child had been hospitalized for a period of 35 days and while ascertaining the compensation the Tribunal provided for `49500/-. The counsel would plead that the pain and suffering for a child at `15,000/- for an amputation of two toes was grossly low. I will increase it to `25,000/-. The Tribunal had provided for 30,000/- towards disability caused for 30% disability assessed. I will take this as constituting a loss of amenities for a young FAO No. 1259 of 1992 2 person to grow with. An amputation invariably results in a loss of earning power and though it may seem an unnatural projection, it is well provided for in the scheme of Workmen Compensation Act. The Act is applicable only to workmen and it would be difficult to take a child aged 7 years as a workman but Schedule II of Motor Vehicles Act which provides for compensation resulting in permanent disability. It suggests the formula adopted in the Workmen Compensation Act as applicable also to injuries suffered in a Motor accident and for prosecution of claims before the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal. The loss of earning capacity for amputation of big toe as constitutes 14% and loss of any other toe at 3%, I will compound them and take the loss of earning capacity as 17%. Since I am making the assessment for a child, when disability would subsist right through its life span, I will take notional income for the child after he attains the age of majority to be in a position to earn in the same manner as Schedule-II provides. Although the accident was for a period prior to the application of Schedule-II, some of the principles enunciated in Schedule-II are still relevant and taking the 17% loss of earning capacity to have been resulted in loss of 2250/-, I would adopt a multiplier of 15 and hold the loss to be 38,250/-. The Tribunal had not provided for transport expenses which on record was shown to be in the range of 586/-. I will provide for 1,000/-. Over all compensation will therefore stand added by 49,250/-. The same is as per the tabulation below:- Medical expenses `4500/- Transport `1000/- Pain and Suffering `25,000/- Disability `30,000/- Loss of earning capacity `38,250/- Loss of amenities `30,000/- FAO No. 1259 of 1992 3 2. The overall compensation payable shall be `1,00,250/-. The amount in excess of what had been granted by the Tribunal shall attract interest at the rate of 6% from the date of petition till the date of payment. 3. The appeal is allowed to the above extent. The liability amongst the respondents shall be in the same manner as determined by the Tribunal. (K. KANNAN) JUDGE January 27, 2011 archana