IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH FAO No.7073 of 2010 (O&M) Date of decision:25.03.2011 Smt. Balwinder Kaur ....Appellant versus Darshan Singh and others ....Respondents CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE K. KANNAN ---- Present: Mr. Parminder 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) The appeal is for enhancement of claim for compensation for injuries suffered in a motor accident where there was a fracture on neck of femur (typed as humerus in the award) and in the pelvic region. The assessment of disability by the doctor was at 7 ½% qua the whole body. The Tribunal found that due to a disability, she would require assistance of somebody and provided for Rs.20,000/- for such disability, which I would understand constituting an assessment for loss of amenities of life as well. Towards pain and suffering, the Tribunal has awarded Rs.20,000/- for the fracture which I believe to be appropriate and just. Of the several heads of claim while addressing the claim for FAO No.7073 of 2010 (O&M) - 2 - medical expenses, a bill for Rs.5,054/- was rejected by the Tribunal by the fact that there was no connecting evidence with reference to who prescribed the medicines and why got to be purchased. It was an unrealistic approach by the Tribunal but I do not think the case must merit an admission only for denial of a claim for an amount of Rs.5,054/- since it was more than off-set by an assessment of compensation for Rs.20,000/- for pain and suffering and Rs.20,000/- for disability. Both of them are somewhere excessive and I would understand that what was refused under a pecuniary head of medical expenses was off-set by a relatively higher amount of compensation that has been assessed under the above two heads. The Tribunal has also provided for Rs.8,000/- towards transportation expenses and Rs.5,000/- for attendant charges, Rs.5,000/- for special diet and has also quantified the value of services of a lady for the house at Rs.8,000/- during the period of her treatment. The overall compensation of Rs.1,01,000/- is appropriate and just and I find no reason to interfere with the award. The award is confirmed and the appeal is dismissed. (K.KANNAN) JUDGE 25.03.2011 sanjeev