Amarjeet Chaudhary, J.@mdashOne Ramesh Chand resident of House No. 9504/6, Sarafa Nagar, Ambala City, had received serious injuries in the road accident on 4.11.1990. Thereafter, he filed a claim petition u/s 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988, seeking compensation to the tune of Rs. 5 lac. The motor accident claims tribunal, Kurukshetra (hereinafter called as the Tribunal awarded a total compensation to the tune of Rs. 34,800/-, to the claimants. The liability to pay the amount of compensation was fastened upon all the respondents jointly and severally.
2. Dissatisfied with the award of the Tribunal, the appellant has filed the present appeal for enhancement of compensation.
3. Counsel for the appellant contends that the appellant is a partner in the firm i.e. M/s Radhe Shyam and Sons, Ambala City and he had suffered loss in his business due to accident. He further contends that the appellant has suffered disability of permanent nature to the extent of 10% and he remained hospitalised for 15 days but the Tribunal had awarded inadequate compensation.
4. The counsel for the respondents contended that the appellant has been suitably compensated. They further contended that there is no scope for enhancement of compensation and as such the appeal deserves to be dismissed.
5. I have heard the counsel for both sides and perused the award of the Tribunal.
6. In the present appeal the only point for consideration before this Court is with regard to the quantum of compensation. The appellant on the date of accident i.e. 4.11.1990 was taken to Civil Hospital, Shahabad and was medico-legally examined by Dr. Bhaskar Gupta, Medical Officer, who found the following injuries on the person of the appellant:
1. There was disfigurement of left thigh in middle, Area was tender, X-ray was advised. Diffused swelling was present.
2. There was a lacerated wound 8 cm x 1 cm on right side of forehead, obliquoly placed from middle or right eye brow to midline, close to hairline, Fresh bleeding was present, Diffused swelling was present. X-ray was advised.
3. Another lacerated wound was present 1 cm. above the medial end of left eye brow 8 cm x 1 cm in size. Area was tender, Fresh bleeding was present, X-ray advised.
4. An abrasion was present 2.5 cm x 1.5 cm in size on prominance of left cheek, Area was tender, Fresh blood was oozing.
5. A lacerated wound was present on chin 1cm x 2cm in size anterior to ankle of mandible, Area was tender, Fresh bleeding was present. X-ray was advised.
7. According to the doctor these injuries were caused by blunt stroke, injuries No. l, 2, 3 and 5 were subject to X-ray examination, injury No. 4 was declared simple.
8. Thereafter the appellant was examined by Dr. Ashok Kumar Nandra, who after conducting the X-ray examination, found fracture of shaft femur (left) and another fracture on the right side of the neck of the appellant. The appellant remained admitted in the hospital from 5.11.1990 to 18.11.1990 where he was operated upon on 8.11.1990 and internal fixation was done. As per disability certificate (Ex.P-7) issued by the medical Board, the appellant has suffered disability of permanent nature to the extent of 10% due to limited motion of left knee and shortening of leg by 2cm. It has come in the statement of the appellant that after operation his gait is not normal due to limb and he would not lift heavy weight. Keeping in view the pain, sufferings mental agony and disability to the extent of 10% of permanent nature, 1 am of the considered view that the compensation awarded by the Tribunal does not commensurate to the same. In my opinion a sum of Rs. 10,000/- instead of Rs. 7,000/- on account of medical expenses and a sum of Rs. 40,000/- instead of Rs. 17,000/- (Rs. 12,000/- = Rs. 5,000/-) on account of disability and pain and suffering would be a suitable compensation and I award the same. The appellant shall be entitled to interest at the rate of 12% per annum on the enhanced amount of compensation. The compensation already awarded by the Tribunal is to be adjusted against the enhanced amount of compensation.
9. The award of the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Kurukshetra, is modified, to the extent indicated above.
10. The appeal is disposed of in the above terms.
