JUDGMENT Mr. K. Kannan J.(Oral) - The appeal is for enhancement of claim of compensation for injuries suffered in a motor accident that took place on 04.09.2008. The claimant had a fracture on right femur, fracture on right clavicle at the right zygomatic arch and injury in the right tibial plateau. The patient had been admitted for about a month commencing from 04.09.2008 to 29.09.2008 at three hospitals. The claimant was a plumber and he was earning Rs.6,000/- per month. The Tribunal while assessing the compensation provided for medical expenses brought through bills and also awarded compensation for special diet, transport, pain and suffering and other loss of amenities. The learned counsel would argue that the Tribunal did not provide for the actual medical expenses which aggregated to Rs.1,33,416/- and would also contend that attendant charges were not properly provided. The counsel has a grievance that the Tribunal has merely taken the evidence of the doctor that the injuries resulted in temporary disablement and would place reliance on additional document produced before the Court, which has been issued by the General Hospital, Sonipat subsequent to the filing of the appeal. The counsel would state that he could not produce it because the disability certificate was secured after closing of the evidence and therefore he did not file it. 2. As regards the claim to the medical expenses, if the bills bear out a larger sum, the same has to be provided. He was in the hospital for a month and the Tribunal has not provided for attendant charges and I will provide for Rs. 2,500/- as attendant charges. If the Tribunal has taken only Rs.5,000/- and Rs.20,000/- for the loss of amenities and for pain and suffering, I would take them as proper and adequate. The Court has provided for Rs.50,000/- as the loss of income which in my view is again proper considering the fact that his income was Rs.6,000/- per month and the calculation works out the loss of income at least for about 8 months when the actual period of hospitalization was itself only for a month. 3. Learned counsel would argue that the disablement was not temporary but it was permanent. The disability certificate which was issued on 18.03.2009 by PW-5 itself states that it is to be reviewed for disablement in six months. 3. Learned counsel would argue that the disablement was not temporary but it was permanent. The disability certificate which was issued on 18.03.2009 by PW-5 itself states that it is to be reviewed for disablement in six months. The period of six months had expired on 18.09.2009 and the decision of the Tribunal itself had been rendered only on 26.10.2010. There was surely an opportunity for the appellant to have brought such a review certificate if it was genuine and could have recalled the doctor who had examined him after a review. Even the additional evidence which is sought to be produced before the Court cannot be received without any further evidence and I see the document is merely scribble with no detail of the manner of assessment of 70%. This certificate again does not say anywhere that it is permanent. I only find that the petitioner had himself apprehension about the credibility of the document and the same was not produced before the Tribunal. I find no reason to modify the assessment already made except a minimal increase for medicines and attendant charges. The claims under different heads are tabulated below:- ----------- Injury Cases ----------- Date of Accident 4.9.2008 Age 28 Period of Hospitalisation: 4,9,2008 to 11.9.2008; 11.9.2008 to 21.9.2008; 22.9.2008 to 29.9.2008 Occupation & Income Plumber 6,000/- Heads of Claim Tribunal High Court Sr. No. Amount Rs. Amount Rs. 1. Loss of income 50,000/- 50,000/- 2. Medical expenses (i) Medicines 1,33,416/- 1,46,021/- (ii) Attendant Charges 2500/- (iii) Special diet 5,000/- 5,000/- 3. Transport 5,000/- 5,000/- 4. Pain & suffering-per fracture/per surgery 20,000/- 20,000/- 5. Reduction in life expectancy/ loss of amenities. 5,000/- 5,000/- Total 2,18,416/- 2,33,521/- ----------- 4. The marginal amount which is in addition to what has been assessed by the Tribunal would attract interest at 7.5% from the date of petition till the date of payment. 5. The award stand modified and the appeal is allowed to the above extent.