THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE P. SWAROOP REDDY C.M.A.No.2283 of 2003 JUDGMENT: This civil miscellaneous appeal is filed by the claimant against the judgment of the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Secunderabad, in O.P.No.104/2000. 2. Heard. 3. The case of the appellant-claimant is that on 28.01.2000 the claimant and his brother while coming on the motor cycle from Bowenpally towards Ranigunj, near C.T.O. office cross roads signal point, the bus bearing No.AEZ 3477 coming from Plaza cross roads side, jumped the traffic signal in a rash and negligent manner and dashed the petitioner. On account of which he fell down and became unconscious. He was shifted to New City Hospital. He suffered fracture of left femur apart from other injuries. Surgeries were performed and nails were fixed. He was bedridden for three months. He was a businessman in Chemicals and allied products. He was taking care of the business individually and after the accident, he is not in a position to concentrate on his business. As such, his income diminished. He was earning Rs.25,000/- per month. He became permanently disabled. He claimed compensation of Rs.6.00 lakhs. The insurance company filed counter denying the petition allegations. On the basis of the above pleadings, the following issues were framed: 1. Whether the accident has taken place due to rash and negligent driving of the R.T.C. bus bearing No.AEZ 3477 by its driver? 2. What is the ‘just’ amount that can be awarded as compensation and against whom? 3. To what relief? On behalf of the petitioner-claimant, P.Ws.1 and 2 were examined, of whom, P.W.1 is the petitioner and P.W.2 is the medical officer and Exs.A1 to A8 were marked. On behalf of the respondents, no oral or documentary evidence was adduced. Considering the material on record, the court below awarded compensation of Rs.55,000/-. Out of which, Rs.15,000/- towards pain and suffering, Rs.25,000/- towards medicines and treatment and Rs.15,000/- towards past loss. Aggrieved by the above quantum of compensation, the present appeal is filed. 4. Now, the only question that arises for consideration is, whether the quantum of compensation awarded by the court below is inappropriate? 5. The claimant claimed an unreasonable amount of Rs.6.00 lakhs for a fracture he suffered in the accident, on account of which, even according to him, he was hospitalized for less than a week and was bedridden for three months. He was doing business of his own in association of his other family members and as such, he did not suffer any substantial loss of income on account of the accident, though he might have suffered pain and might have been put to inconvenience, and he must have suffered some temporary discomfort. 6. The medical evidence revealed that he suffered only fracture of left femur and nothing else. According to P.W.2 the medical officer, nails were fixed and that were to be removed, subsequently he must have spent some money. There is no substantial loss as already referred. The court below has not granted any compensation towards temporary disability he suffered and permanent disability he might have suffered and towards transport charges, extra nourishment etc. Considering all these circumstances, another amount of Rs.20,000/- can be granted. Accordingly, the compensation is enhanced from Rs.55,000/- to Rs.75,000/-. Interest on the enhanced amount of compensation shall be at 6% per annum. 6. Accordingly, C.M.A. is partly allowed enhancing the compensation from Rs.55,000/- to Rs.75,000/-. No order as to costs. ______________________ P. SWAROOP REDDY, J. 30th November 2010, Rns