Legal Document View

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

- Know your Kanoon - Doc Gen Hub - Counter Argument - Case Predict AI - Talk with IK Doc - ...
Upgrade to Premium
[Cites 0, Cited by 4]

Punjab-Haryana High Court

Raj Pal Son Of Meer Singh Resident Of ... vs Shri Ashok Kumar Son Of Puran Mal And ... on 13 January, 2011

Author: K. Kannan

Bench: K. Kannan

F.A.O. No.1045 of 2010                             -1-

 IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATES OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT
                        CHANDIGARH

                              F.A.O. No.1045 of 2010
                              Date of Decision. 13.01.2011

Raj Pal son of Meer Singh resident of village Bidhlan Tehsil Kharkhoda
District Sonepat

                                                   .....Appellant
                                 Versus

Shri Ashok Kumar son of Puran Mal and others
                                                   ......Respondent

Present: Mr. Ashish Pannu, Advocate
         for the appellant.

            Mr. R.C. Gupta, Advocate
            for the respondent.

CORAM:HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE K. KANNAN

1.  Whether Reporters of local papers may be allowed to see the
    judgment ?
2. To be referred to the Reporters or not ?
3. Whether the judgment should be reported in the Digest?
                                -.-
K. KANNAN J.(ORAL)

1. The appeal is for enhancement for injury suffered in an accident. The appellant has suffered fractures in his leg and an operation had been performed. The functional disability arising on account of the fracture was ascertained by the doctor treating him at 30%. He had also given evidence that the possibility of percentage of disability being reduced with treatment could not be ruled out as it was temporary in nature. For a temporary disability, the Tribunal had provided for Rs.30,000/-, for pain and suffering Rs.10,000/- and added another Rs.10,000/- for medical expenses.

2. Learned counsel for the appellant contends that he would require physio-therapy right through his life. I do not find any such F.A.O. No.1045 of 2010 -2- evidence anywhere that physio-therapy is required right throughout his life time.

3. All the heads of the claims for compensation have been properly addressed. There is no scope for enhancement. The appeal is dismissed.

(K. KANNAN) JUDGE January 13, 2011 Pankaj*