Judgment Mehtab S. Gill, J. 1. C. M. No.8374 of 1999. Delay of 24 days in re-filing the appeal is condoned and the C. M. is allowed. 2. This judgment will dispose of two appeals, viz. , R. S. A. No.4750 of 1999 and r. S. A. No.4751 of 1999 as the facts are common and these pertain to the same occurrence dated 25.3.1988. 3. The appellant Veena Rani filed a suit for the recovery of Rs.2,00,000 from the respondents. She stated in the plaint that on her visit to Abohar in connection with some marriage when she was passing through Johri Mandir Road, Abohar, she fell into an uncovered manhole and suffered serious injuries on her left leg and foot. Due to these injuries, she was admitted in the hospital and was treated by Dr. Kulwant Rai Ahuja of Abohar and, thereafter, shifted to Gupta Hospital, Bhatinda. Ultimately, her left leg had to be amputated due to the injuries suffered by her. The appellant at that time gave birth to a premature male baby on 27.4.1988, who died after two days of that delivery. She went through lot of pain and suffering. She also lost one of her left leg and male child due to negligence on the part of the respondents. She stated further that she was 22 years of age and her husband is not earning much and she was helping her husband in the livelihood and her normal life has been disturbed. 4. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and with their assistance have gone through the record carefully. 5. Learned counsel for the appellant has stated that it was the duty of the respondents to maintain the manhole and to get it covered. 6. Veena Rani, plaintiff (now appellant)has come to the witness-box and reiterated her version as given in the plaint. Dr. Kul-want Rai Ahuja of Abohar stepped into the witness-box as PW 1 and has stated that he medico-legally examined the appellant veena Rani. The two eyewitnesses, i. e. , pw 2 Jagan Nath and PW 3 Dev Raj corroborated the version put forth by the appellant. PW 4, Dr. Amit Gupta of Bhatinda, stated that as gangrene had set in the left leg of the appellant, the same had to be amputated. X-ray reports, Exhs. P-4 to p-6 were placed on record. PW 4 Dr. PW 4, Dr. Amit Gupta of Bhatinda, stated that as gangrene had set in the left leg of the appellant, the same had to be amputated. X-ray reports, Exhs. P-4 to p-6 were placed on record. PW 4 Dr. Amit gupta and PW 5 Dr. M. L. Kamra also stepped into the witness-box and stated that a premature male child was delivered on 27.4.1988. Discharge certificate Exh. PW 5/1 was placed on record. Husband of the appellant Vinod Kumar also appeared in the witness-box as PW 7 and corroborated the version put forward by the appellant. Further, respondents produced two witnesses, i. e. , DW 2 H. D. Mehta, J. E. and DW 3 Boor Singh stated that manhole never remained uncovered but during his cross-examination, he admitted that sewerage system in Abohar was not functioning properly and road conditions in general were bad. He further admitted that there were four manholes on the Johri Mandir road, Abohar. DW 4 Jagga Singh, another witness of the respondents also admitted that sewerage system and the roads in abohar are not in good condition. 7. Going through the evidence on the file there is not an iota of doubt that the appellant was injured due to the cover not being put on the sewerage hole. Moreover, the doctors have also proved the version put forward by the appellant. Due to amputation of her leg and loss of a child, the appellant must have gone through pain and suffering. 8. The appellant has stated that she was helping her husband Vinod Kumar in the running of household affairs as he did not have any job. Considering all the facts and circumstances of the case, the trial court awarded a sum of Rs.90,000 due to the pain and suffering and the loss of her left leg. Further interest at the rate of 6 per cent per annum from the date of institution of suit was also awarded. I do not find any infirmity or illegality in the same and the amount does not appear to be on the higher side and does not call for any interference and the respondents are liable to pay the amount jointly and severally to appellant. 9. For the reasons stated above, the appeals are allowed and the judgment and decree dated 4.6.1999 passed by the learned Addl. Distt. 9. For the reasons stated above, the appeals are allowed and the judgment and decree dated 4.6.1999 passed by the learned Addl. Distt. Judge, Ferozepur are set aside and that of the trial court is restored. Appeals allowed.