RAM PAL Vs. VINOD KUMAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS appeal under Section 173 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 is directed for enhancement of compensation against the Award of the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal-I, Sirmaur District at Nahan, H.P. (hereinafter referred to as the Tribunal), in MAC Petition No. 21-MAC/2 of 1998 decided on 4.10.1999.

(2.) THE appellant along with his friend Rajinder Singh was on Motor Cycle No. CHH-3435, which was hit by a TATA Sumo No. DL-8-CB-0190. The factum of the accident is not in dispute. Even the finding on the issue of negligence is not under challenge. The only question to be decided in this appeal is, what is the just and reasonable compensation, which the appellant is entitled to.

(3.) THERE is no doubt that the accident took place. There is also no doubt that the claimant suffered injuries in the accident. Photocopy of the discharge slip of PGI Chandigarh which is Ext. P-61 clearly shows that the appellant was admitted on 27th October, 1997 and discharged on 29th October, 1997. In the diagnosis mere is mention of fracture of both bones of right leg which were operated upon and treatment done. On discharge from PGI the appellant was advised to get his dressing done at an interval of 3 days in local hospital. He was also advised to get stitches removed in local hospital on 11.11.1997 i.e., after about two weeks. He has been advised to do active quardriceps exercise and knee bending exercise. It has also been mentioned that he can walk with non-weight bearing crutches. In the discharge slip some medicines were prescribed for him for 3 days and thereafter certain other medicines were prescribed for him for a period of 5 to 10 days. The appellant has visited the PGI after his discharge six times on 12.11.1997, 26.11.1997, 16.12.1997, 18.12.1997 and 19.2.1998. On 19.2.1998 the fixators were removed from the leg of the appellant. There is nothing on record with regard to his treatment after 19.2.1998.