IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH FAO No.1927 of 1999 (O&M) Date of decision:02.06.2011 Tejpal Bhanot ...Appellant versus Roshan alias Kalbhay Hassan and others ....Respondents CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE K. KANNAN ---- Present: Mr. Manav Bajaj, Advocate, for the appellant. None for respondents 1 to 3. Mr. Paul S. Saini, Advocate, for respondent No.4. ---- 1. Whether reporters of local papers may be allowed to see the judgment ? No. 2. To be referred to the reporters or not ? No. 3. Whether the judgment should be reported in the digest ? No. ---- K.Kannan, J. (Oral) 1. The appeal is for enhancement of claim for compensation for injuries sustained in a motor accident. He had fractures in his arm which were recorded by the hospital in the following words:- “Close fracture right ulna with segmental fracture right radius with inter condylar fracture compound Grade-I right humerus with blunt trauma chest.” 2. He had been under treatment for a period of nearly 6 months and the evidence was that he was unable to go to his work and earn his FAO No.1927 of 1999 (O&M) - 2 - salary. The doctor had certified a permanent disability consisted of 20% loss of elbow flexion on right arm with 20% loss of forearm rotation wrist movement of the right arm. The doctor, however, stated that the disability could improve with constant physiotherapy exercise and another operation can also be performed to treat the disability. The claimant had tendered medical bills P7 to P53 worth Rs.16,861/-, but gave evidence to the effect that he had spent about Rs.2 lakhs. While assessing the disability, the Tribunal awarded Rs.90,000/- that included the cost of medicines, hospital charges, special diet, transportation, attendant charges at Rs.25,000/-. For pain and suffering and for loss of earning, the Tribunal has provided for Rs.20,000/- and for future loss of enjoyment of life, pain and suffering and future loss of earning, the Tribunal has provided for Rs.45,000/-. 3. The learned counsel for the petitioner states that he was working as a Spinning Master in a Spinning Mill and gave evidence to the effect that he could not work with his arm as he used to work earlier and that he is still felt pain in his arm and was taking medicines. He gave evidence to the effect that he was earning Rs.5,000/- per month as salary and he could not go to work for 6 months. The salary certificate produced was assigned Mark A but not exhibited in evidence for want of adequate proof. 4. As regards the medical expenses, I will retain Rs.16,000/- as brought through bills and make a small addition through various heads like, special diet at Rs.2,500/-, transportation at Rs.5,000/-, attendant charges at Rs.5,000/-. For two fractures that resulted in pain and FAO No.1927 of 1999 (O&M) - 3 - suffering, the Tribunal had awarded Rs.20,000/-, which I will retain. For the loss of enjoyment of life arising out of the physical disability, Rs.45,000/- awarded by the Tribunal, which also I retain. There is no clear-cut evidence about the loss of earning capacity but having regard to the fact that he was working in a Spinning Mill, the work must have involved the use of the arm and the inconvenience that he may have to suffer, I will quantify at Rs.25,000/- and for the loss of income for 6 months, I will provide for Rs.25,000/-. The overall compensation would come to Rs.1,43,500/-. The amount in excess over what has been determined already by the Tribunal shall attract interest at 6% from the date of petition till date of payment. The liability shall be in the same manner as determined by the Tribunal. 5. The award stands modified and the appeal is allowed to the above extent. (K. KANNAN) JUDGE 02 .06.2011 sanjeev