Judgment :- (Judgment of the Court was delivered by P. SATHASIVAM, J.) 1. The claimant in M.C.O.P. No. 586 of 1994 on the file of the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal (Third Additional Subordinate Judge), Tiruchirapalli is the appellant in the above appeal. In respect of grievous injuries sustained by him in a motor vehicle accident that took place on 28.8.93, he filed the said claim petition before the Tribunal claiming compensation of Rs. 15 lakhs. The claim petition was resisted by the Insurance Company, 2nd respondent therein by filing counter statement. The Tribunal after considering oral and documentary evidence and after holding that the accident was caused due to rash and negligent act of the driver of the lorry M.S.R. 8253, and that the claimant sustained serious injuries, passed an award for Rs. 5,00,000/- with interest at 12 per cent from the date of petition till date of deposit. Regarding the disallowed claim, the claimant has preferred the present appeal. 2. Heard the learned counsel for the appellant. Though the respondents were duly served with notice of this Court, none of them has chosen to contest the appeal by engaging a counsel. 3. The appellant has filed C.M.P. No. 11661 of 2001 for reception of 8 documents, as described in the Schedule appended to that petition as additional evidence in the above appeal. We shall consider the said petition at the appropriate time. 4. In view of the fact that the present appeal is only by the injured claimant for higher compensation and in the absence of independent appeal or cross objection by the owner or insurer of the vehicle, it is unnecessary for us to consider the facts leading to the negligence aspect. The injured claimant was examined as P.W.1. He deposed in his evidence that due to the road accident, he sustained fracture in his left leg below knee, and a steel rod of the cycle seat on which he was riding penetrated his stomach, thereby the Urethera in his Urinary Bladder was cut to an extent of 2 c.m. He also deposed that he had another fracture near the left side of the hip. He further deposed that because of the said injuries, urine is coming without any control, that only by insertion of a tube in the penis, he is able to pass urine at his option, and that he is not able to squat. He further deposed that because of the said injuries, urine is coming without any control, that only by insertion of a tube in the penis, he is able to pass urine at his option, and that he is not able to squat. Apart from his evidence, Dr. Elangovan was examined as P.W.2. He deposed that due to skin grafting he found a scar to an extent of 16 c.m., on the left side thigh of his leg and his left leg has been shortened by 2 inches. He also deposed that the hip movement has been considerably reduced. According to him, he cannot rotate or turn like others. He assessed the ortho disability at 15 per cent in respect of the hip movement and at 40 per cent in respect of left leg. His disability certificate has been marked as Ex. A 1-12. 5. With regard to damage to Urethera, Dr. K.S. Devanathan, Urologist was examined as P.W.3. He explained before the Court the treatment given by him. He further deposed that because of the damage in the urethra and urinary bladder, blood was coming out from the urinary tube, that his urinary bladder was found swelling and that by way of an operation, a hole was put in the urinary bladder and a temporary system has been formulated for taking out urine from the urinary bladder. He further deposed that the once again examined him after 3 months and due to the cut and damage in the urine tube, he advised the injured to go to Christian Medical College Hospital, Vellore for further treatment. He also explained that in spite of taking continuous treatment at Trichy as well as at Christian Medical College hospital at Vellore, even now the injured feels difficulty in passing urine and every day he has to insert a separate tube in the penis to take out urine from the urinary bladder for which necessarily he has to spend for Rs. 100/- per day. After analysing the case sheet and the present position, he assessed the disability in so far as urology is concerned at 25 per cent. His disability certificate was marked as Ex. A-14. he also expressed that because of the said injury and damage, he cannot eject his semen from his male organ and cannot have a martial life at any point of time. His disability certificate was marked as Ex. A-14. he also expressed that because of the said injury and damage, he cannot eject his semen from his male organ and cannot have a martial life at any point of time. The Tribunal after considering the oral evidence of the injured-P.W.1 and the two doctors-P.Ws.2 and 3 as well as documentary evidence-Exs. A-12 and A-14, has granted Rs. 2,18,000/- towards permanent disability as well as loss of future prospectus Rs. 30,000/- towards pain and sufferings, Rs. 2,50,000/- towards medical expenses as seen from Ex. A-6 series, Rs. 2,000/- towards nutritious food and altogether passed an award of Rs. 5,00,000/- with interest at 12 per cent from the date of petition till date of deposit. 6. As stated earlier, the appellant has filed C.M.P. No. 11661 of 2001 for reception of 8 documents to prove the agony undergoing by the appellant/claimant every day and the nature of treatment to be given for passing of urine without any difficulty. A perusal of the evidence of P.Ws. 1, 2, 3 as well as the assessment made by the two doctors-P.Ws. 2 and 3 and the respective disability certificates Exs. A-12 and A-14 would clearly show that the appellant has to undergo treatment throughout his life time because of injury sustained due to the accident. Apart from the permanent disability referred to above, the appellant has highlighted the present complications in the affidavit filed in support of C.M.P. No. 11661 of 2001. It is stated that due to sudden complication, he has to undergo another surgery in order implant some equipments. According to him, Dr. K.S. Devanathan, M.S., M.Ch., (Uro) (P.W.3) referred him to Dr. Vasan on 20.3.2000 for Urodynamic study. Pursuant to the said request, he underwent various tests through Laborie medical Technologies Urodynamic Analyser, UDS-600 of 25.32000 in Diacon Institute of Neuro-Urology and Andrology, Bangalore. After verifying all the tests reports, according to the appellant, Dr. Vasan, D.N.B., (Urology), F.I.C.S., recommended requirement of penile prosthesis and implantation and use of artificial Urinary Sphincter surgery. Dr. Vasan has also anticipated the cost of surgery and equipment around Rs. 5 lakhs. According to him, without the implantation, he could not pass urine in the normal course. The appellant has stated that he could not produce the documents, annexed in the petition before the trial Court. Dr. Vasan has also anticipated the cost of surgery and equipment around Rs. 5 lakhs. According to him, without the implantation, he could not pass urine in the normal course. The appellant has stated that he could not produce the documents, annexed in the petition before the trial Court. After going through the various documents, namely, reference letter given by Dr. K.S. Devanathan to Dr. Vasan, Cystometrogram diagnosis report, Uroflow report, Penile Doppler study given by Dr. Kiran, report of Dr. Vasan, recommendations of Dr. Vasan as well as Literature of Artificial Urinary Sphincter, we are satisfied that those documents can be marked as additional evidence in the above appeal. Accordingly, C.M.P. No. 11661 of 2001 is ordered as prayed for, consequently serial numbers 1 to 8 mentioned in that petition are marked as Ex. A-16 to A-23. 7. Now we shall assess the proper compensation payable to the appellant. We have already referred to the evidence of P.W.1 as well as the other two doctors-P.Ws.2 and 3. P.W.2, the doctor who assessed the disability has issued Ex. A-12 which reveals permanent disability to the extent of 15 per cent due to the fracture in the hip and 40 per cent due to the fracture in the left leg. P.W.3, Urologist, has also assessed the damage to the urology system at 25 per cent. His disability certificate is Ex. A-14. Considering the evidence of P.Ws.2 and 3 as well as Exs. A-12 and A-14 and the sufferings of the appellant, particularly for passing urine, we are inclined to grant Rs. 2,00,000/-towards permanent disability. The Tribunal has granted Rs. 30,000/- for pain and sufferings. We have already referred to the evidence of P. Ws. 1 to 3, shortening of left leg by 2 inches, fracture in the hip, restriction in the hip movement, damage to the urinary tube, operation undergone and to be done for implantation etc., hence we fix Rs. 1,00,000/- towards pain and sufferings. 8. Though the Tribunal has clubbed together permanent disability and loss of future, prospects and granted Rs. 2,18,000/- for the same, we are of the view that loss of future prospects have to be assessed separately. 1,00,000/- towards pain and sufferings. 8. Though the Tribunal has clubbed together permanent disability and loss of future, prospects and granted Rs. 2,18,000/- for the same, we are of the view that loss of future prospects have to be assessed separately. At the time of the accident, the injured was aged about 19 years and we have also referred to the permanent disability in Ortho as well as Urology and with these disabilities the appellant cannot do any work till the rest of his life. P.W.3 Dr. Devanathan, Urologist, has deposed that, Tamil He furher deposed that even after treatment at Christian Medical College Hospital, Vellore, there was a block in the urine tube and again he was operated. He also deposed that he cannot control urine. For this he deposed,” Tamil Regarding loss of marriage prospects, P.W.3 has explained. Tamil It is clear from his evidence that due to the accident, the appellant lost the entire urology system and he cannot have marital relationship at any point of time. Further, the present assessment made by Dr. K.S. Devanathan P.W.3 and referring the appellant to Dr. Vasan for further studies as well as implantation and use of artificial Urinary Sphincter surgery, we are of the view that the appellant has not only lost his employment opportunities, but had also to forego his personal comforts throughout his life. Taking note of all the above aspects, including the opinion offered by P.W.3 and his recommendation to Dr. Vasan for future course of action, we are of the view that the appellant would be entitled to a further sum of Rs. 3 lakhs towards loss of future prospects including loss of marital relationship. 9. Based on the medical bills and expenses spent, the Tribunal has granted Rs. 2,50,000/- towards medical expenses which we confirm the same. 10. Considering all the above ailmens, period of treatment and the agony undergoing even now, the amount of Rs. 2,000/- granted towards nutritious food cannot be sustained and we increase the same to Rs. 10,000/-. 11. In this appeal, after satisfying ourselves, we have marked Exs. A-16 to A-23 as additional evidence. We have also perused the letter of Dr. K.S. Devanathan-RW.3 to Dr. K. Vasan and other documents relating to Pennile Doppler study, report of Diacon Institute of Neuro-Urology and Andrology by Dr. 10,000/-. 11. In this appeal, after satisfying ourselves, we have marked Exs. A-16 to A-23 as additional evidence. We have also perused the letter of Dr. K.S. Devanathan-RW.3 to Dr. K. Vasan and other documents relating to Pennile Doppler study, report of Diacon Institute of Neuro-Urology and Andrology by Dr. Vasan as well as Urinary Incontinence and the Guide for Men published by American Medical Systems marked as Ex. A-23. We accept the test report of Dr. Vasan as well as his recommendation, namely, requirements of penile prosthesis and artificial urinary sphincter surgery. We also accept the anticipated cost of surgery and equipment of Rs. 5,00,000/- Taking note of the grievance expressed by the appellant that without the surgery and implantation as recommended by Dr. Vasan, he could not pass urine in the normal course and after considering various tests reports submitted by the Institute and recommendations made by the Doctors which established the gravity of the injury and the sufferings due to the accident, we grant a further sum of Rs. 5,00,000/- for the purpose of implantation, surgery and for fixation of artificial Urinary Sphincter (AUS). 12. The amount granted under various heads are as follows: — Rs. Permanent disability: 2,00,000/- Pain and Sufferings: 1,00,000/- Loss of future prospects and) Loss of Marital relationship): 3,00,000/- Medical expenses (already spent): 2,50,000/- Nutritious food: 10,000/- Future medical expenses in implantation): 5,00,000/- Surgery and for fixation of artificial) Urinary Sphincter (AUS)) Total Compensation 13,60,000/- 13. In the light of what is stated above, we modify the amount arrived by the Tribunal and pass an award of Rs. 13.60,000/- in favour of the claimant/appellant. In view of the recent judgment of the Supreme Court in Kaushnuma Begum v. The New India Assurance Company Ltd. , reported in 2001 (1) Supreme page 5, we grant interest at the rate of 9 per cent for the award amount. Since the vehicle is covered by a valid insurance policy, the 2nd respondent-Oriental Insurance Company is directed to deposit the award amount before the Tribunal within a period of eight weeks, and on such deposit being made, the claimant is permitted to withdraw the same. 14. Net result, the appeal is allowed in part to the extent mentioned above. No costs. Exhibits marked in the appeal: — Ex. A. 16-20.3.2000 Reference Letter given by Dr. K.S. Devanathan to Dr. Vasan. (Original). Ex. 14. Net result, the appeal is allowed in part to the extent mentioned above. No costs. Exhibits marked in the appeal: — Ex. A. 16-20.3.2000 Reference Letter given by Dr. K.S. Devanathan to Dr. Vasan. (Original). Ex. A. 17-25-3-2000 Report of Cystometrogram diagnosis. (Original). Ex. A. 18-25-3-2000 Report of Uroflow. (Original). Ex. A. 19-25-3-2000 Urodynamic Analyzer Report. (Original). Ex. A 20-25-3-2000 Penile Doppler Study given by Dr. Kiran. (Original). Ex. A. 21-25-3-2000 Report of Dr. Vasan. (Original). Ex. A.22-14-7-2001 Recommendation of Dr. Vasan. (Original). Ex. A. 23 Literature of Artificial Urinary Sphincter. (Original).