IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH FAO No.1810 of 1993 (O&M) Date of decision: 09.02.2011 Navdeep Singh ....Appellant versus State of Haryana and others ....Respondents CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE K. KANNAN ---- Present: Mr. Samuel Gill, Advocate, for Mr.Jatinder J.C.Nagpal, Advocate, for the appellant. Mr. Kunal Garg, AAG, Haryana, for respondents 1 and 3. None for respondent No.2. ---- 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 against the award seeking for enhancement of claim for compensation for injuries suffered in an eye. The doctor had been examined to say that the vision was 6/9 + 6/9 and stated that it was not a very serious disability. It was assessed at 5%. The attempt of the claimant was that he could not see anything in one eye, but the Tribunal tested this version in Court by asking him to state the time by looking at the clock which he recorded in the judgment that the claimant was able to do correctly. The Tribunal was, therefore, of the view that the claimant FAO No.1810 of 1993 (O&M) - 2 - was making an exaggeration, but still granted compensation of Rs.35,000/- that included Rs.5,000/- for medical expenses, Rs.5,000/- for extra diet and Rs.5,000/- for disability and Rs.20,000/- for pain and suffering. 2. The learned counsel for the appellant states that the medical expenses must have been awarded at Rs.25,000/-. This plea I find to be without any basis. No document had been produced by the claimant to make a justification for an additional claim for medical expenses. The compensation of Rs.5,000/- for the disability caused also seems appropriate and the component of pain and suffering has been adequately addressed. I do not find any scope for intervention for making an enhancement of the claim. 3. The award is confirmed and the appeal is dismissed. (K.KANNAN) JUDGE 09.02.2011 sanjeev