In the High Court of Punjab and Haryana at Chandigarh F.A.O. No. 1398 of 2009 (O&M) Date of decision: September 17, 2009 Aneesh minor through his father and natural guardian .. Appellant Vs. Sher Mohd. and others .. Respondents Coram: Hon'ble Mr. Justice A.N. Jindal Present: Mr. Sandeep Jasuja, Advocate for the appellant. Mr. R.C. Gupta, Advocate for the Insurance Company. A.N. Jindal, J This appeal for enhancement is directed against the award dated 21.5.2008 passed by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Gurgaon, awarding compensation to the tune of Rs.75,000/- along with interest @ 7.5% per annum, in favour of the claimant-appellant (herein referred as 'the claimant') Briefly stated, the facts of the present case are that on 21.8.2004, the claimant the was cleaning motor cycle No.HR26G-4321 in front of the shop of his uncle Mohd. Shahid at Bus Stand Shikrawa. At about 6 p.m. the respondent No.2 while driving M & M Pick Up bearing registration No.HR55-B-8202, very rashly and negligently struck against the petitioner as a result of which he suffered fracture on his left femur. The claim petition was contested by the Insurance Company. From the pleadings of the parties, the following issues were framed :- 1. Whether accident causing injuries to claimant Aneesh occurred due to rash and negligent driving of vehicle No.HR-55-B-8202 by driver Mohd. Samim? OPP 2. Whether claimant suffered injuries on his person, if so what extent? OPP 3. What amount of compensation the claimant is entitled to and from whom? OPP 4. Whether driver Mohd. Samim was not holding a valid and effective driving licence?OPR-3 F.A.O. No. 1398 of 2009 -2- *** 5. Whether respondents No.1 and 2 have violated terms and conditions of the policy?OPR-3 6. Relief. Learned counsel for the appellant has contended that the claimant suffered 16% disability as his one leg was shortened by 2- ½ due to the accident but the Tribunal has awarded a meager sum of Rs.16000/- on account of disability. Having examined the impugned award, it may be observed that the Tribunal fell in error while awarding inadequate compensation to the claimant who suffered shortening of leg by 2- ½ inch. Besides, he remained hospitalized from 13.10.2004 to 20.10.2004 and underwent operation. He must have spent huge amount on the medicines, transportation and must also be needing future treatment. As such, the compensation awarded by the Tribunal appears to be inadequate. Resultantly, the appeal is partly allowed and the compensation is enhanced to Rs.1,50,000/- along with interest at the same rate as awarded by the Tribunal from the date of filing of the petition till actual realization. September 17, 2009 (A.N. Jindal) deepak Judge