FAO No. 7288 of 2011 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH FAO No. 7288 of 2011 Date of decision :06.12.2012 Bittoo ....Appellant V/s Raju & ors. ....Respondents BEFORE : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJAN GUPTA Present: Mr. Ravin Gakhar, Advocate for Mr. Jagdish Manchanda, Advocate for the appellant. RAJAN GUPTA J. Present appeal has been preferred impugning the award dated 12.05.2011 passed by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Karnal. Learned counsel for the appellant has argued that appellant suffered multiple injuries in the accident. Thus, compensation granted is on the lower side and needs to be enhanced. I have heard learned counsel for the appellant. It appears that an accident occurred on 30.07.2008. Appellant along with one Pawan Kumar was coming from Haridwar on a motorcycle. When they reached near Ram Pur Chauraha on GT road Muzaffar Nagar (UP), the offending vehicle (a TATA vehicle) came from Muzaffar Nagar side struck against their motorcycle. Due to impact, appellant fell down and received multiple injuries all over his body. He was shifted to Government hospital, Muzaffar Nagar from where he was referred to PGI, Rohtak. An FIR was also FAO No. 7288 of 2011 2 registered regarding the accident under section 279/338/304-A IPC. On a claim being lodged, tribunal held that accident was caused due to rash and negligent driving of the offending vehicle. Tribunal after taking into account medical bills exhibited by the appellant, awarded a sum of `31,700/- towards medical expenses. It after taking into account amount spent on special diet due to the nature of injuries suffered in the accident granted a sum of `1300/- towards special diet and nutrition. Another sum of `5,000/- was awarded on account of pain and suffering and lost amenities of life. As appellant remained under treatment for some time, `2,000/- was awarded towards transportation. Total compensation was, thus, worked out as `40,000/-. In my considered view, adequate compensation has been granted after taking into account all the factors. Medical bills which were exhibited on record were taken into consideration by the tribunal. It appears that appellant lead no documentary evidence which could prove his loss of income on account of accident except his statement before the tribunal. No interference is required in appellate jurisdiction of this court. Appeal is without any merit and is hereby dismissed. December 06, 2012 (RAJAN GUPTA) Ajay JUDGE