F.A.O. No. 6026 of 2010 1 .. IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH F.A.O. No. 6026 of 2010 Date of Decision: September 21st,2011 Ramal .... Appeallant Versus Satya Prakash alias Dholia and others .... Respondents CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIJENDER SINGH MALIK Present Mr. Manjit K.Tanwar, Advocate, for the appellant. Mr. Karan Singh, Advocate, for respondent Nos. 1 and 2. Mr.Paul S. Saini, Advocate, for respondent No.3. VIJENDER SINGH MALIK, J. This is an appeal of the claimant for enhancement of compensation. It is directed against the award dated 9.4.2010 passed by Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Narnaul (for short, "the Tribunal"). The claimant has sought compensation in a sum of Rs.30.00 lacs for the injuries suffered by him in a motor vehicle accident, that took place on 24.4.2008. He has claimed that on 24.4.2008, he was going on foot, holding motor-cycle bearing registration No. HR-18A-4808 by hand. It was at about 12.30 in the noon, when he was in the area of Village Surhati Jakha that a pick- up bearing registration No.HR-34E-0122, driven by respondent No.1, came in a rash and negligent manner, from his back side and struck against his motor cycle on account of which, he suffered injuries. Respondent No.1 made good his escape after the accident. Respondents No.1 and 2 denied the very factum of F.A.O. No. 6026 of 2010 2 .. accident. The case registered against them is claimed to be false. Respondent no. 3 – National Insurance Company has even denied the involvement of the pick-up in the accident. It has claimed that the vehicle in question was not being driven in accordance with the terms and conditions of the Insurance policy as respondent No.1 was not holding a valid and effective driving license at the time of accident. On the pleadings of the parties, following issues were framed :- 1. Whether respondent no.1 was driving the offending vehicle bearing registration no. HR-34-E-0122 in a rash and negligent manner and caused the accident and as a result thereof, the claimant sustained injuries as alleged in the petition?OPP 2. Whether the claimant is entitled to get the amount of compensation, if so what amount and from whom?OPP 3. Relief. Taking evidence of the parties and hearing learned counsel representing them, learned Tribunal awarded compensation in a sum of Rs.2.00 lacs to the claimants vide the impugned award. Dissatisfied with the same, the claimant has brought this appeal. I have heard Sh. Manoj K.Tanwar, Advocate for the appellant, Shri Karan Singh, Advocate, for respondents No. 1 and 2 and Sh. Paul S. Saini, Advocate, for respondent no.3 and have gone through the record carefully. Learned counsel for the appellant has submitted that learned Tribunal has assessed Rs.25,000/- as compensation for the permanent disability, Rs. 10,000/- for pain and suffering, Rs.5000/- for special diet and attendant and Rs.5,000/- for transportation. According to him, the appellant has not been duly compensated in this case because he has spent more than Rs.1,35,000/- on his treatment. According to him, he remained hospitalized for long and underwent operation thrice. According to him, at least the F.A.O. No. 6026 of 2010 3 .. compensation assessed for pain and suffering is on lower side. Learned counsel for the respondents have submitted that the compensation assessed by the learned Tribunal is adequate and does not deserve enhancement. Learned Tribunal has noticed in paragraph No. 15 of the award that the appellant remained admitted in the hospital from 24.4.2008 to 4.5.2008. It has further been noticed that he had three fractures and the fractured bones were operated upon to put implants. In such a situation, the hospitalization is although for 10 days, yet, the recovery would have taken longer time and the appellant could not be taken as duly compensated by a sum of Rs.10000/- awarded to him by the Tribunal. Similarly, the compensation of special diet and attendant is also on lower side. The disability, in this case, is 12% as per Exhibit PW6/A and in case of a young person, a sum of Rs.25,000/- for this disability is also on lower side. Keeping in view the aforesaid circumstances, I find that a sum of Rs. 25,000/- above the amount awarded by the Tribunal would take care of all the points raised by learned counsel for the appellant. Therefore, the appeal is allowed and the award is enhanced by Rs.25,000/-. The amount of enhanced compensation shall be payable by respondent No. 3 within six weeks from today, failing which, the appellant would be entitled to interest on the said amount, at the rate of 7.5% per annum, from today, till the date of realization. (VIJENDER SINGH MALIK) JUDGE September 21st ,2011 som