FAO No.2329 of 1994(O&M) [ 1 ] IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATES OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH ... FAO No.2329 of 1994(O&M) Decided on : November 09, 2009 Kiran Bala ... Appellant VERSUS Tasvir Singh and others ... Respondents CORAM : HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE A.N.JINDAL Present: Mr.Ashish Aggarwal, Advocate for the Appellant. None for the respondents. A.N.JINDAL, J.- Vide award dated 2.6.1994, Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Karnal had awarded compensation to the tune of Rs.1,04,000/- to claimant – appellant Kiran Bala (herein referred as the claimant) on account of the injuries suffered by her in a motor vehicle accident, which resulted into amputation of her right arm. The respondents have neither challenged the negligence, nor their liability. However, the claimant has sought enhancement in the compensation. As per medical evidence, her right arm has been amputated. Driver of the offending vehicle, namely Tasvir Singh (RW1) admitted the amputation of her right arm during the accident. Dr.D.P.Goel (PW4) also corroborated him, saying that total disability suffered by her was 80% qua the limb and 36% qua the whole body. FAO No.2329 of 1994(O&M) [ 2 ] As regards the quantum of compensation, it has come in evidence that she was earning Rs.400-500/- per month, while working as made servant in different houses. In addition to it, she must be serving in her own house. She was 22 years old, at the time of the accident. Thus,, while assessing the loss suffered by her at Rs.250/- per month i.e. Rs.3000/- per annum, and after applying the multiplier of 18, the total pecuniary loss suffered by her comes to Rs.54,000/-. The Tribunal fell in an error in awarding compensation to the tune of Rs.36,000/- for the disability suffered by the claimant. While relying upon the Division Bench judgment of this Court (in case Piara Singh and others vs. Satpal Kumar and others, 2006(4) RCR(Civil) 546), again a Division Bench of this Court in case Ram Kiran Goyal vs. Sub Divisional Engineer, Mechanical and others, 2008(2) RCR (Civil) 103, held as under:- “...However, the compensation which has been awarded for admitted permanent disability needs to be enhanced and for that, we are inclined to follow the decision of Division Bench of this Court referred to above where Rs.2000/- has been awarded for 1% disability to the injured. On that count, the compensation in respect of permanent disability which is awarded vide Ex.P31 as 55%, the compensation is thus, assessed @ Rs.2000/- for every 1% disability to the tune of Rs.1,10,000/-.” The aforesaid principle of Rs.2000/- for every 1% permaent FAO No.2329 of 1994(O&M) [ 3 ] disability, was required to be applied in the case in hand. Therefore, keeping in view the 36% permanent disability, the Tribunal should have awarded Rs.72,000/-, instead of Rs.36,000/-. Besides, nothing was awarded by the Tribunal for the future treatment, transportation and for attendant during her hospitalisation. As such, it would not be in excess, if Rs.30,000/- are awarded on the aforesaid three heads. As such, on due consideration of all the facts and circumstances, the claimant Kiran Bala is held to be entitled to the following compensation:- Loss of Income = Rs.54,000/- Permanent disability = Rs.72,000/- Cost of treatment = Rs.10,000/- Cost of future treatment = Rs.10,000/- Transportation expenses = Rs.10,000/- Expenses on attendant during hospitalisation = Rs.10,000/- Pain and Sufferings = Rs.10,000/- TOTAL = Rs.1,76,000/- Hence, the present appeal is partly accepted and the claimant Kiran Bala is held entitled to Rs.1,76,000/- along with interest as per impugned award. All other terms of the impugned award shall remain intact. November 09, 2009 ( A.N.JINDAL ) `gian' JUDGE