F.A.O.No. 1044 of 1987 -1- IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH F.A.O.No. 1044 of 1987 Date of decision : 20.11.2008. Satyapal Yadav ....Appellant Versus Naresh & others ...Respondents CORAM : HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE MAHESH GROVER .... Present : Mr. Anil Ghanghas, Advocate for the appellant. Mr. Nilesh Bhardwaj, Advocate for respondent No.2. Mr.N.K.Khosla, Advocate for respondent No.3. ... MAHESH GROVER, J. This appeal is directed against the award of the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Narnaul dated 21.1.1986. The appellant suffered multiple injuries which have been established on record by way of testimony of PW7 Dr.Vinod Goyal, Ortho Department, L.N.J.P.Hospital, Delhi. The Tribunal after considering the evidence on record awarded a sum of Rs.25,000/-for pain and suffering, permanent disability and loss of amenities of life, Rs.5,000/- on account of medical expenses and special diet etc. and Rs.5,130.60 for loss of earnings. In this manner, a total compensation of Rs.35,130.60 was F.A.O.No. 1044 of 1987 -2- awarded along with interest at the rate 12% per annum from the date of claim petition till its realisation. Dissatisfied with the award, the appellant is in appeal. After hearing the learned counsel for the parties and perusing the award, I am of the opinion that the award deserves to be modified and the compensation deserves to be enhanced. It has come on record by way of testimony of PW7 Dr.Vinod Goyal that the appellant remained hospitalised from 22.8.1985 till 14.10.1985, i.e. slightly less than two months. He was also operated upon twice for the injury of the mandible and for the fracture of his leg. There is no evidence, however, to suggest as to what is the amount spent on the treatment and operations which he has undergone. There is also no evidence to suggest regarding the disability suffered by the appellant, as the doctor has opined that the injuries were curable but the limping will remain. However, limping itself is a disability even though it may not impair the normal functioning, but it certainly is likely to cause some discomfort throughout his life. Considering the fact noticed above, I am of the opinion that the amount awarded under the head pain and sufferings is inadequate. The appellant has undergone two surgeries and even if a conservative estimate is taken, then the appellant deserves at least Rs.15,000/- for each surgery. Therefore, he is held entitled to a sum of Rs.30,000/- for the surgeries and hospitalisation which is over and above the amount of Rs.25,000/- already awarded to him under the head 'pains and sufferings, permanent disability and loss of F.A.O.No. 1044 of 1987 -3- amenities of life'. The appellant is also awarded a sum of Rs.5,000/- on account of transportation charges. The remaining amounts do not warrant any interference. In this manner, the total amount of compensation works out to Rs.70,130.60. The enhanced amount of compensation shall be paid along with interest @ 9 % per annum from the date of filing of the petition till its realisation. The liability to satisfy the award shall remain the same as has been determined by the Tribunal. With the aforesaid modification in the impugned award, the appeal stands allowed. 20.11.2008 (MAHESH GROVER) dss JUDGE