FAO No.1960 of 2009(O&M) [ 1 ] IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATES OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH ... FAO No.1960 of 2009 (O&M) Decided on : July 27, 2009 Akabad ... Appellant VERSUS Mehmuda and others ... Respondent CORAM : HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE A.N.JINDAL Present: Mr.Sandeep Jasuja, Advocate for the Appellant. Mr.Pradeep Goyal, Advocate for the respondent – Insurance Company. A.N.JINDAL, J.- Akabar – claimant/appellant (herein referred as `the claimant) has challenged the award dated 2.12.2008 passed by Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Gurgaon, awarding compensation to the tune of Rs.76,575/- on account of the injuries suffered by him in a vehicular accident dated 8.7.2006. Contention regarding inadequacy of compensation has been raised on the grounds that he had to remain admitted in the Hospital from 8.7.2006 to 17.7.2006 and had to take follow up treatment for the next six months; on account of the fracture suffered by him in fibula bone at junction of upper and middle third, which resulted into 15% disability on FAO No.1960 of 2009(O&M) [ 2 ] account of mild painful restriction of movements at right knee and right ankle joint following compound fracture. Heard. Admittedly, the facts are not in dispute, which have been proved by the claimant himself while appearing as PW4, Dr.Mohd.Farrukh, Medical Officer, General Hospital, Mandhikhera (PW1) and Dr.S.K.Batta (PW3) have also proved the injuries and the disability suffered by the claimant. Though, the Tribunal has awarded adequate compensation on account of the medical treatment, pain and suffering as also for the disability suffered by the claimant, but it appears that it fell into error, while assessing no amount on account of the transportation charges, particularly when the claimant had suffered fractures in his right leg. Secondly, the `loss of income' has been assessed at Rs.10,000/-, which too is on the lower side as it is proved on record that the claimant had been working as Conductor and due to fractures in his right leg, he could not attend his job for long. Thus, in the peculiar facts and circumstances of the case, it would be in the fitness of things if the compensation of Rs.76,575/- is enhanced to the tune of Rs.90,000/-, without any other change in the terms of the impugned award. Ordered accordingly. July 27, 2009 ( A.N.JINDAL ) `gian' JUDGE