FAO No.1698 of 2010 (O&M) -1- IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATES OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH FAO No.1698 of 2010 (O&M) Date of Decision. 09.02.2011 Gurdeep Singh son of Kartar Singh, resident of House No.703, Sector 6, Urban Estate, Karnal Distt. Karnal ......Appellant Versus Sh. Jai Bhagwan son of Sh. Budh Ram and others .....Respondents Present: Mr. Ajit Atri, Advocate for the appellant. None for respondent Nos.1 and 2. Ms. Vandna Malhotra, Advocate for respondent No.3. CORAM:HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE K. KANNAN 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. In a fire accident at the Record Section of Civil Revision/FAO Branch of this Court on 30.01.2011, several files were burnt. 2. The registry has reported that the file is not available and it is likely that the papers connected with the case have been consumed in fire. Learned counsel for the appellant has furnished copy of all the relevant papers connected with the case. The papers submitted shall substitute the papers that are unavailable and shall constitute for all practical purposes as the records of the court. Papers are duly reconstructed in the above fashion. 3. The appeal is for enhancement of compensation for injuries FAO No.1698 of 2010 (O&M) -2- suffered by a claimant, who was 72 years of age. He had a fracture of the left femur and of the right tibia condyle. The fractures were reduced by open surgery and by fixation of plates with screws. The Tribunal had awarded Rs.72,212/- that included Rs.8,000/- for pain and suffering. Learned counsel states that he had suffered fracture in both legs and he had to be literally held for his mobility and a provision for only Rs.1500/- for attendant charges and Rs.8,000/- for pain and suffering were grossly inadequate. According to him, he had undergone two surgeries and he has gone through lot of pain and suffering. I have attempted to standardise the scale of compensation for injuries to keep in tune with the law laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Raj Kumar Vs. Ajay Kumar 2010 (12) SCC 205 and I will provide for Rs.7500/- for each fracture and Rs.5,000/- for surgical intervention. The only addition, which I would make in this case is to provide for Rs.25,000/- as against Rs.8,000/- awarded for pain and suffering. Learned counsel also makes a plea for enhancement for medical expenses from Rs.31712/- by another Rs.7,000/-, which had been covered through bills. This aspect had been particularly dealt with by the Tribunal finding that they related to some medicines for heart ailment which was a chronic ailment and which would not have been due to injuries suffered in the accident. The Tribunal had also found some discrepancy with regards to dates which were mentioned in the bills, which could have no bearing to the accident injuries. I will not make any intervention with reference to the medical bills. 4. Under such circumstances, the compensation will be enhanced by a further amount of Rs.17,000/- and it will bear interest @6% from FAO No.1698 of 2010 (O&M) -3- the date of the petition till the date of payment. The award is modified and the appeal is allowed to the above extent. (K. KANNAN) JUDGE February 09, 2011 Pankaj*