The court's decision emphasizes the need for evidence and reasonableness in determining the quantum of compensation in personal injury claims.

1. Appellant-Insurance Company has challenged the Award only on the quantum. The finding on negligence and the liability of the Insurance Company to compensate the claimants is not disputed.

2. Accident in this case happened on 21.12.2007. Gaurav-claimant, a 22 years young man running a photoshop, was traveling in the matador bearing No. JK02F-3266 and on reaching Sarore Adda, a vehicle bearing No.PB-07-R-5699 going from Jammu towards Vijaypur collided with the said matador. As a result the claimant was injured. He suffered cervical spine injury with quadriplegia. Injured was hospitalized for 21 days from December 2007 to February 04, 2008. He claimed compensation of Rs. 34.00 lacs and has been awarded Rs. 25.00 lacs in the following manner:

S. No.	Head	Award
1.	For loss of future income	Rs. 11,52,000/-
2.	For pain and sufferings	Rs. 2,25,000/-
3.	For loss of amenities of life	Rs. 2,00,000/-
4.	Expenses incurred on medicines Physiotherapy	Rs. 1,00,000/-
5.	Future expenses to be incurred on medicines and physiotherapy	Rs. 2,00,000/-
6.	Transport charges incurred	Rs. 38,000/-
7.	Future transport charges	Rs, 75,000/-
8.	Attendant charges incurred Rs.	72,000/-
9.	Future attendant charges	Rs.2,88,000/-
10.	Special diet charges	Rs. 50,000/-
11.	Future Special diet charges	Rs. 1,00.000/-
Total		Rs. 25,00,000/-
With interest @ 7.5% per annum

3. In appeal the learned counsel for the appellant-Insurance Company contended those additional claims were made in the claim petition, without any supporting material or evidence. The Tribunal has granted exorbitant amounts under several heads. To be specific the compensation under the following Heads is pleaded as not justified:

Head 1.	Loss of income determined is excessive
Head 2 & 3	The award is exorbitant under these two heads.
Head 4 & 5	The award is in excess as against the bills. No proper documentary proof has been placed in support.
Head 6 to 9	The additional amounts have been granted as against the claim made in the petition.
Head 10 & 11	Under these heads the amount has been granted are excessive and not commensurate with the nature of injury.

3. Considering the young age of injured/claimant the nature of injury, the witness examined to support the claim, the Tribunal took into consideration the evidence of the claimant, i.e., Dr. I. K. Wangnoo, Pw-Bua Ditta who issued Disability certificate. Except petitioner no other witness was examined to say about the future expenses that is to be incurred for diet charges, etc.

Loss of future income

Insofar as this Head is concerned due to nature of accident and injuries suffered, disability is 100%. Therefore, the sum of Rs. 11,52,000/-fixed as compensation based on loss of earning capacity due to injury and 100% disability appears to be justified. Even though Rs.6000/- per month is objected as excessive, however the possibility of a young earning higher income in future cannot be ruled out. Hence, the sum of Rs.11, 52,000/- stands confirmed.

Pain and suffering

The Tribunal has granted Rs.2,25,000/-as against claim of Rs.5,00,000/-. The Tribunal has taken into consideration the 100% disability suffered, the nature of injury, i.e., cervical spine injury with quadriplegia, whereby the injured is unable to walk as before. There will be pain and suffering for the rest of his life. Therefore, this Court finds no reason to reduce the quantum any further and the same stands confirmed.

Loss of amenities of life

Considering the nature and injury and 100% immobility, the Tribunal granted Rs. 2,00,000/- which is not excessive and the same is confirmed.

Expenses incurred on medicines & Physiotherapy & Future expenses to be incurred on medicines and physiotherapy