FAO No. 490 of 2011 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA, CHANDIGARH FAO No. 490 of 2011 Date of decision April 20, 2011 Pawandeep Singh ....... Appellant Versus Ajit Sharma and others ........Respondents CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE K. KANNAN Present:- Ms. Maninder Kaur, Advocate for Ms. Sonia G Singh, Advocate for the appellant. **** 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). CM No. 1655-CII of 2011 1. There is a delay of 25 days in refiling the appeal. For the reasons stated in the application, application is allowed. Delay of 25 days in filing the appeal is condoned. CM No.1656-CII of 2011 2. There is a delay of 7 days in filing the appeal. For the reasons stated in the application, application is allowed. Delay of 7 days in filing the appeal is condoned. FAO No.249 of 2011 3. The appeal is for enhancement of claim for FAO No. 490 of 2011 2 compensation for injury suffered in a motor accident. The claimant was 22 years of age and on account of the accident he had a fracture of right femur, right tibia, right humorous and right both bones of fore arm. He had been operated on and had a period of hospitalization from 11.9.2007 to 19.9.2007 and again from 22.1.2008 to 9.2.2008. He had incurred `2,03,396/- towards medical treatment which was awarded by the Tribunal. He had produced transportation bill of `55,128/- which was also awarded. The doctor had assessed the disability at 48% but as the evidence showed that it was a temporary set back for the petitioner, for subsequent to the accident he had completed his MBA course. The Tribunal had reasoned that he had become reasonably normal and provided `9,000/- for the disability, which I would understand was for the loss of amenities of life which has occurred temporarily. The Court had awarded `10,000/- for pain and suffering and `25,000/- for loss of future prospects for life. although the assessment for pain and suffering is relatively low for the surgery that he had undergone and for the fracture that he had also suffered. The inadequacy has been more than made up by reasonably higher assessment of the compensation for the temporary disability and assessment of loss of future prospects. The over all assessment of compensation at 3,89,500/- in my view, is appropriate and just and would require no further intervention for enhancement. 4. The award is confirmed and the appeal is dismissed. (K. KANNAN) JUDGE April 20, 2011 archana