IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH FAO No.4216 of 2007 Date of decision:13.08.2010 United India Insurance Company Limited ....Appellant versus Rajesh and others ...Respondents II. FAO No.4217 of 2007 United India Insurance Company Limited ....Appellant versus Smt. Shakuntla and others ...Respondents CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE K. KANNAN ---- Present: Mr. Gopal Mittal, Advocate, for the appellant. None for the respondents. ---- 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 two appeals are by the Insurance Company seeking for an adjudication on an issue of quantum, the Insurance Company had a benefit of defence under Section 170 of the Motor Vehicles Act. 2. As regards the subject matter of appeal in FAO No.4216 of 2007 that resulted in a case of injury, the Tribunal has taken note of not FAO No.4216 of 2007 - 2 - merely the medical bills to the tune of Rs.67,108/- but has also taken into account cash memos which were exhibited as P-92 to P-131. The Tribunal had, in my view, the reason to rely on them also, since there was a testimony offered through Dr. Vijay Gupta and the Tribunal has observed that those bill memos had been proved through the doctor. The Tribunal therefore took into account the amounts mentioned in the memos and arrived at a figure of Rs.1,00,707/-. The amount in excess has been borne out through documents and the Tribunal has therefore awarded the same. I find no error to make an intervention in appeal. The Tribunal has also provided for claim for Rs.1,35,000/- towards pain and sufferings. It is in evidence that the injury was in his head and he had been taking treatment in a Neuro Hospital with Dr. Vijay Gupta, who has stated that he was admitted in hospital on 16.12.2004 and he was operated upon on his head for treatment of the right front temporal parietal depressed fracture with underlying contusions. An injury to a head, unlike other parts of the body, not merely the whole body but accentuates and suffering also. The compensation awarded by the Tribunal is, therefore, maintained. 3. As regards the other claim in FAO No.4217 of 2007 arising out of a claim where the deceased was under prolonged treatment and succumbing to injuries, the medical bills had been for Rs.1,57,471/- and there have also cash memos that added upto Rs.2,45,685/-. The justification for the memos and the reliance on those memos obtained in the same fashion as I have dealt with in the connected case. I uphold the claim for the medical expenses as awarded by the Tribunal in toto. I do FAO No.4216 of 2007 - 3 - not find any reason to interfere with the award even as regards the claim which is the subject matter in FAO No.4217 of 2007. Both the appeals are dismissed. (K.KANNAN) JUDGE 13.08.2010 sanjeev