entitled to get an amount of 69,000/- additionally. It is awarded. For₹ transportation expenses the appellant claimed an amount of 30,000/-.₹ However, the Tribunal granted only 1,000/-. As noticed hereinbefore,₹ the evidence on record would reveal that the appellant had different spells of hospitalisation. Taking into account such aspects we are inclined to grant ₹ 4,000/- more under the head transportation expenses. As regards extra nourishment an amount of 25,000/- was₹ claimed but, the Tribunal granted only an amount of 1,000/-. The₹ impugned award itself would reveal that the appellant had been an inpatient for a period of 123 days. If an amount of 100/- is taken as₹ the amount spent for extra nourishment per day the appellant is entitled to get an amount of 11,300/- additionally. We award the said₹ amount under the head extra nourishment. Towards bystander's expenses an amount of 10,000/- was claimed and the Tribunal₹ granted 12,300/- viz., at the rate of 100/- per day for a period of₹ ₹ 123 days. The accident occurred in the year 2007 and the evidence on record would reveal that since he continued his treatment even at the fag end of the year 2008 we are of the view that in such circumstances, the rate of bystander's expenses has to be enhanced to 200- per day₹ for a period of 123 days. Based on such calculation the appellant is entitled to get an amount of 12,300/- additionally under the said₹ head. Under the head pain and sufferings the appellant claimed ₹ 50,000/- and the Tribunal granted 20,000/-. Exts.A2 to A6 would₹
