S.S.SODHI,J. - (1.) THE claim in appeal here is for enhanced compensation. The claimant being Subhash Chander who sustained injuries when while driving his scooter, he was involved in an accident with the bus PUK-6068 coming from the opposite direction. This happened at about 10 P.M. on March 18, 1982 on the Mohali-Chandigarh Road. It was the finding of the Tribunal that the bus-driver was wholly to blame for the accident. A sum of Rs. 8,000/- was awarded as compensation to Subhash Chander.
(2.) A reference to the evidence on record would show that the claimant-Subhash Chander was about 33 years of age at the time of this accident When he came into the witness box, it was the testimony of the claimant that in this accident, he sustained injuries on his head, shoulder and foot and he remained admitted in the Post Graduate Medical Institute, Chandigarh for 5 days and then Spent four months at home in bed with his leg in plaster. He also deposed that he has constant pain in his right foot and he cannot put it straight. His right hand too, he stated, does not function normally. According to him, he spent about Rs. 6,000/- on his medicines and conveyance charges. Besides this, he claimed that he had suffered a loss of Rs. 8,000/- in earnings being a typist in his typing institute. To depose to the injuries on the person of the claimant, there is the statement of P.W. 3 Dr. S.S. Sandhu from the Department of Orthopedic of the Post Graduate Medical Institute, Chandigarh, who deposed that on his admission to the hospital, he found compound type two fractures of the first and second meta torsels of the right foot along with the fracture of right clevical. In hospital, deprivement of the wound was done under general anesthesia and plaster was applied below the knee. Subhash Chancier, he stated, was admitted in the hospital on March 19, 1982 and was discharged on March 21, 1982. Further, he deposed that he had examined the claimant on the day, he gave his testimony which was October 25, 1983 and found a disability in the movement of the ankle joint and in the right foot there was moderate limitation of motions with pain. He assessed the permanent physical impairment and loss of physical function of the right foot at 20 per cent.
(3.) IT may be mentioned here that in appeal, an application for additional evidence had also been filed with a view to show the present physical condition of the claimant with reference to the injuries suffered by him in this accident. This application was, however, not pressed.;