In the High Court of Punjab and Haryana at Chandigarh F.A.O. No. 3558 of 2009 Date of decision: October 15, 2009 Pepsu Road Transport Corporation Faridkot Depot, Faridkot .. Appellant Vs. Ashok Kumar .. Respondent Coram: Hon'ble Mr. Justice A.N. Jindal Present: Mr. Gurinder Singh Gill, Advocate for the appellant. Mr. Gurcharan Dass, Advocate for the respondent. A.N. Jindal, J Pepsu Roadways Transport Corporation, Faridkot Depot, Faridkot (Appellant) has assailed the award dated 10.3.2009 passed by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Ludhiana (herein referred as 'the Tribunal') awarding compensation to the tune of Rs.85000/- on account of the injuries suffered by the claimant-respondent Ashok Kumar (herein referred as 'the claimant') along with interest @ 7.5% per annum. The case in brief is that on 15.8.2005, after boarding bus No.PB-11-AB-7338 from Rajpura, the claimant was going to Ludhiana. The driver Jeet Singh-respondent no.1, while driving the bus rashly and negligently climbed on the divider of the road causing injuries to the passengers including the claimant. Consequently, he filed the present claim petition which was contested by the respondents No.2 and 3 as well as the appellant. From the pleadings of the parties, the following issues were framed :- 1. Whether claimant Ashok Kumar received injuries in motor vehicular accident which took place with bus F.A.O. No. 3558 of 2009 -2- No.PB-11/AB-7338 being driven by Jeet Singh, driver respondent No.1 in a rash and negligent way?OPP 2. Whether the claimant is entitled to the compensation? If so, to what extent and from whom?OPP 3. Relief. In order to prove his claim, the claimant Ashok Kumar himself stepped into the witness box as PW-1 and tendered his duly sworn affidavit Ex.CW1/A along with documents Ex.C-1 to Ex.C-10. He also examined Pawandeep Singh Dhillon (CW2), Dr. Sukhdev Sharma (PW3), Dr. Arun Kumar Gupta (PW4), Sandeep Kumar (PW5) and Vinod Kumar (PW6). To the contrary, respondents tendered into evidence copy of the DDR Ex.R-1. Ultimately the claim petition was accepted and compensation was awarded to the claimant in the aforesaid terms. It is duly established on record from the evidence of Ashok Kumar himself (CW1) that the respondent No.2 was negligent in driving the bus. The DDR has not been duly proved on record in accordance with law. As such, the evidence led by the claimant regarding the negligence on the part of the respondent No.2 remains un-shattered. As regards the other argument regarding exaggeration in compensation, it may be observed that Ashok Kumar while appearing in the witness box tendered his affidavit Ex.CW1/A containing his statement submitted that he remained admitted in the hospital from the date of accident i.e. 15.8.2005 in Civil Hospital, Fatehgarh Sahib where he was given first aid and thereafter he was referred to Dayanand Medical College and Hospital, Ludhiana for further treatment of multiple fractures of the thigh, bone and jaw. He could not get proper treatment there as such he got himself admitted in Sardar Avtar Singh Grewal Memorial Mediscan Hospital & Nursing Home, Ludhiana on 15.8.2006 and was discharged on 3.9.2006. He was operated for implant of ROD in his left thigh bone. He further testified that he was not fully cured and is visiting S.A.S. Memorial Hospital for follow up treatment. On examining the evidence with regard to the expenses suffered by him on account of his hospitalization, operation, transportation, special diet, loss of income and pain and sufferings, the Tribunal appears to F.A.O. No. 3558 of 2009 -3- have taken harsh view against the claimant while assessing the compensation on the lower side, however, keeping my reservations of interference on the question of compensation in this appeal preferred by the appellants, it would be appropriate to dismiss the same. Dismissed. October 15, 2009 (A.N. Jindal) deepak Judge