FAO No. 548 of 1988 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH FAO No.548 of 1988 Decided on : 10-12-2008 S. Paramjit Singh ....Appellant VERSUS Signalman Nem Singh and another ....Respondents CORAM:- HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MAHESH GROVER Present:- Mr. Maharaj Bakhsh Singh, Advocate for the appellant. MAHESH GROVER, J This appeal is directed against the award of the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Chandigarh dated 2.1.1988. The appellant was injured in an accident which took place on 19.10.85. The appellant was riding a scooter and negotiating a round about, traffic on which was being controlled by a Constable. On the signal being given by the traffic Constable, appellant is said to have stopped his scooter. Thereafter, on getting a clearance he re-started the engine of his scooter to negotiate the remaining round about whereupon respondent no.1 who was riding a motor cycle hit him from the left side causing him injury in the process. The Tribunal awarded a compensation of Rs.30,000/- considering the nature of injuries and the permanent disability suffered by the appellant which is stated to be to the tune of 10% which has resulted in shortening of left leg by ½ inch. The amount of compensation i.e. Rs.30,000/- was slashed by 50% as the appellant was held guilty of contributory negligence to the FAO No. 548 of 1988 2 extent of 50%. Dis-satisfied with the award, the appellant is in appeal. After hearing learned counsel for the appellant and perusing the award, I am of the considered opinion that the findings recorded by the Tribunal on the issue of negligence is incorrect. Concededly, the traffic was being manually controlled by a traffic Constable who had signalled the appellant to stop to enable the traffic from the other side to proceed. After getting clearance from the Constable, the appellant was in the process of motion and was on the right side and according to the Schedule it is the traffic which is coming from the right side had right of passage which was not observed by respondent no.1 who struck the scooter from the left side causing injury in the process. There is no evidence to suggest that the appellant in any manner was guilty of any contribution to the accident. The responsibility consequently lies with the respondent no.1 alone who caused the accident. Therefore, the finding on the issue of contributory negligence is hereby reversed and respondent no.1 is held liable to have caused the accident. In so far as the amount of compensation is concerned, learned counsel for the appellant has contended that appellant is 46 years of age and has suffered shortening of left leg by ½ inch and permanent disability to the extent of 10%. In this manner, an amount of Rs.5,000/- awarded on account of pain and suffering is inadequate. Even the amount awarded on account of permanent disability is grossly inadequate. After considering the contentions raised by the learned counsel for the appellant, I am of the considered opinion that the amount of the FAO No. 548 of 1988 3 compensation awarded to the appellant deserves to be enhanced. The appellant was granted a sum of Rs. 9728/- for the loss of salary, Rs.10,000/- for permanent disability, Rs. 5000/- for pain and suffering and Rs.5,000/- for special diet. By applying the principle of Rs.2000/- for each percentage of disability, an amount of Rs.10,000/- awarded for permanent disability is enhanced to Rs.20,000/-. The appellant remained immobilised for a fairly long period. Therefore, it would be just and appropriate to enhance the amount of Rs.5,000/- under head of pain and suffering to Rs.10,000/-. Rest of the amounts do not warrant any interference. In this manner, total compensation comes to Rs. 44,728/- which is rounded off to Rs.45,000/-. The enhanced amount of compensation shall be paid alongwith interest at the rate of 9 % per annum from the date of filing of petition till the date of its realisation. The liability to pay the amount shall be the same as has been determined by the Tribunal. The appeal stands allowed in the aforesaid terms and the award of the Tribunal is modified accordingly. December 10, 2008 (Mahesh Grover) rekha Judge