FAO No.3674 of 2001 1 IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATES OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH. FAO No.3674 of 2001 Date of decision: January 16, 2009 Harnek Singh ...Appellant Versus State of Punjab and others ...Respondents CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJAN GUPTA Present: Mr. Ashwani K. Arora, Advocate, for the appellant. Mr. Yatinder Sharma, DAG, Punjab. Rajan Gupta, J. The claimant has preferred the present appeal seeking enhancement of compensation awarded by the Tribunal on the ground that in view of 35% disability suffered by him in respect of the entire body, he is entitled to higher compensation. The appellant met with an accident on 10th March, 1999, due to which his leg below knee had to be amputated. He had to undergo two operations in PGI, Chandigarh. In the next operation, his leg had to be amputated above the knee. The Tribunal after holding that it was the bus in question which was responsible for the accident, awarded a total compensation of Rs.1,70,000/- to the claimant. While awarding compensation, the Tribunal took into consideration various factors such as pain and suffering, loss of amenities, loss of earning capacity, expenses incurred on medical treatment and other special damages. The Tribunal also came to the conclusion that the appellant, FAO No.3674 of 2001 2 who had been serving in a company known as 'M/s D.C.M. Ansro' for the last 20 years, had lost his job. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and given careful thought to the entire matter. Learned counsel for the appellant has argued that the Tribunal did not award adequate compensation under various heads. Learned counsel for the State, however, opposed the contention of the appellant and submitted that the appellant had been adequately compensated in respect of 35% disability suffered by him and also on various other counts. Keeping in view the fact that due to rash and negligent driving of the bus, the leg of the appellant was crushed and he had to be operated twice, once for amputation below knee and next time for amputation above knee, the appellant deserved much higher claim by way of compensation. A perusal of the award shows that the Tribunal took into account all factors such as medical expenses incurred on the treatment, loss of amenities, loss of earning capacity etc. and awarded adequate compensation. However, I feel that since the leg of the appellant was crushed in the accident and he had to undergo two successive operations, the compensation granted for pain and suffering is on the lower side. First the left leg of the appellant was amputated in PGI, Chandigarh below the knee. However, due to complications, another operation had to be performed to amputate the same leg above the knee. FAO No.3674 of 2001 3 I am, therefore, of the view that compensation payable in respect of pain and suffering deserves to be enhanced. The Tribunal granted Rs.50,000/- to the appellant on account of pain and suffering undergone by him. In my view, it will meet the ends of justice if the compensation under this head is enhanced by another sum of Rs.30,000/-, taking the total compensation payable to Rs.2,00,000/-. The Tribunal has awarded interest @ 9% per annum on the amount of compensation from the date of filing the claim petition till realization. The compensation having been enhanced to Rs.2,00,000/-, the appellant would be entitled to the same rate of interest i.e. 9% per annum on the enhanced amount i.e. Rs.30,000/- from the date of filing the claim petition till realization. The appeal is allowed in the aforesaid terms. (RAJAN GUPTA) JUDGE January 16, 2009 'rajpal'