IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH FAO No.92 of 1994 (O&M) Date of decision:11.02.2011 Daulat Ram Sharma ....Appellant versus Surinder Kumar and others ..Respondents CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE K. KANNAN ---- Present: None for the appellant. Mr. Raj Kumar Bashamboo, Advocate, for respondents 3 and 5. None for respondents 1, 2 and 4. ---- 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 injuries suffered in a motor accident. The claimant was a Sub Inspector of Police and he had suffered fractures of the mandible, fracture of ribs, right chest sub-trochanteric fracture of the right femur, bimolecular fracture left ankle and multiple superficial injuries. There was evidence to the effect that he had taken treatment at KD Hospital, Ambala Cantt. and remained there as an inpatient from 02.07.1990 to 18.08.1990 and then from 24.10.1990 to 30.10.1990 and again from 18.04.1991 to 30.04.1991. The FAO No.92 of 1994 (O&M) - 2 - claimant contended that he had remained on leave for 5 months and that he had still not recovered fully at the time of trial. His contention was that he could not sit and walk properly because of stiffness of joints and that he could not walk without the help of his stick. He stated that his juniors had been promoted and that he was not able to work with the same vigour as he was working before. His contention was that his promotion had been withheld. 2. Though he stated that he had spent Rs.2 lakhs for his treatment, he had produced medical bills for Rs.42,542/-. The Tribunal made a rough estimation and awarded Rs.60,000/- towards medical expenses. However, it was admitted by the claimant that since he was a government employee, he was entitled to free treatment, but he chose to go to a private practitioner. He did not secure a full reimbursement. The Tribunal, therefore, held that he was entitled only to 50% of the amount. If a person is entitled to free treatment, but he, however, secured treatment in a private hospital for better medical care, he cannot suffer any loss and make it possible for a tort feasor to claim a benefit on that score. The provision for merely 50% of the expenses was, therefore, wrong and I would, therefore, award to the claimant the entire amount as assessed by the Tribunal namely, Rs.60,000/-. For the four fractures that he had suffered, I will award Rs.5,000/- per fracture and for two surgeries undertaken, I will provide for another Rs.5,000/-. Towards a component of pain and suffering, I hold that the claimant will be entitled to Rs.25,000/-. I would provide for Rs.2,500/- as special diet and another Rs.5,000/- towards transportation. As regards the assessment FAO No.92 of 1994 (O&M) - 3 - regarding the loss of earning and promotion chances, the Tribunal held that the claimant was 50 years of age and he had 8 years of service left. With no clear evidence about the nature of disability and whether there was any definite material to show that promotion had been withheld to him only on account of any such disability that he had incurred, the Tribunal chose to provide for Rs.20,000/- on account of loss of promotion prospects. I find that to be a fair assessment and retain the same. For the inconvenience suffered by him and the loss of amenities on account of permanent disability, the Tribunal had already awarded Rs.60,000/- which I will retain. Overall, there shall be an addition of compensation of Rs.62,500/- over what has been already awarded by the Tribunal and that amount will attract interest at 6% from the date of petition till date of payment. The liability shall be in the same manner as determined by the Tribunal already. 3. The appeal is allowed to the above terms. 4. Since there is no representation for the appellant, the copy of the order shall be despatched to the party directly by the Registry on the address given in the memo of parties. (K.KANNAN) JUDGE 11.02.2011 sanjeev