FAO No.382 of 1998 -1- IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATES OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH FAO No.382 of 1998 Date of Decision.10.11.2010 Durga Dass Soni s/o Desh Raj r/o B-13, 304 Old Cantt. Road, Faridkot. ......Appellant Versus Punjab State through District Collector, Amritsar and others ......Respondents Present: Mr. Gurvinder Singh Sidhu, Advocate for the appellant. None for the respondents. CORAM:HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE K. KANNAN 1. Whether Reporters of local papers may be allowed to see the judgment ? 2. To be referred to the Reporters or not ? 3. Whether the judgment should be reported in the Digest? -.- K. KANNAN J.(ORAL) 1. The appeal is for enhancement of compensation for injury sustained in an accident. The matter had been placed before the Lok Adalat and the Lok Adalat had suggested an amount of Rs.1,67,340/- over and above the amount already awarded. The order passed by the Lok Adalat was recalled by this Court in view of the objection taken by the State Government that order had been passed without its consent. I proceed, therefore, to examine the claim for compensation independently. 2. The claimant had the following injuries namely:- “fracture of both bones of the right leg, shaft femur, both bones of fore-arm and mandible that serial operations were undertaken during the course of his admission in the form FAO No.382 of 1998 -2- of open reduction and internal fixation for fracture tibia, fracture humerus and demur and Durga Dass discharged and all this is contained in bed head ticket No.487/92-93.” 3. The Tribunal had granted a compensation of Rs.1,90,289/- already. The said amount included loss of wages for five months @Rs.7000/-. The evidence was that the appellant had been hospitalized for 9 months and the provision for compensation only for loss of 5 months was not appropriate. The appellant was working in Cooperative Bank and as per the rules, he could get earned leave encashed at the time of retirement and therefore, the Tribunal had awarded the leave encashment only for a period of five months. If this logic were to be applied, the Tribunal must have awarded a compensation for one more month for leave encashment that would be ultimately denied to the claimant. I will, therefore, award an additional amount of Rs.7,000/- towards loss of wages. As regards the expenses incurred for medicines, the Tribunal had provided only for Rs.15,000/- when actually the bills exhibited before Tribunal A-1 to A-12 totalled up to Rs.30,200/-. I would provide for compensation the entire sum covered through the bills and would hold the appellant to be entitled to a further sum of Rs.15,859/-. The claimant had 50% disability and the counsel states that as per the decision of the Division Bench of this Court, he was entitled to be compensated @Rs.2,000/- per percentage for disability. I accede to the claim in the manner made and I would provide for the compensation at Rs.1,00,000/- towards disability, which means an additional amount of Rs.70,000/- over Rs.30,000/- already awarded by the Tribunal. It FAO No.382 of 1998 -3- was also contended that a future hospitalization would require three months of hospitalization and there would be resultant loss of income for three months. I will provide for loss of future income @Rs.7,000/- for another three months @Rs.21,000/-. In all the additional amount that will become payable would be Rs.1,13,859/-. This additional amount will bear interest @6% from the date of petition till the date of payment. 4. The appeal is allowed to the above extent. (K. KANNAN) JUDGE November 10, 2010 Pankaj*