IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) PRESENT THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE G.V.SEETHAPATHY C.M.A.No.1924 OF 2002. Date:12.11.2009. Between:- The National Insurance Co., Ltd., rep.by its Branch Manager, Khammam. ..Appellant/R-3 And Kolligapogu Pullaiah and others .. Respondents/Petitioner, R-1 and R-2. JUDGMENT:- This appeal is directed against the order dated 15.03.2002 passed in M.A.C.T.O.P.No.1047 of 1996 on the file of the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal – cum Additional District Judge, Khammam wherein the claim of respondent No.1 herein was allowed in part awarding compensation of Rs.2,06,800/- along with interest at 9% p.a. from the date of the petition. Heard the learned counsel for the appellant and the learned counsel for respondent No.1. Perused the records. Respondent No.1 herein filed the claim petition before the Tribunal seeking compensation of Rs.2,51,000/- on account of injuries sustained by him in a motor vehicle accident that occurred on 02.04.1996. According to the claimant, on that day, while himself and one Gundi Singaraj were going on a bicycle, a lorry bearing No.AAH 4554 coming from Aswaraopet side driven in a rash and negligent manner, dashed against the claimant, as a result of which, the claimant sustained fracture on right leg besides other injuries and he was shifted to Government Hospital, Sathupally and from there, referred to Government Hospital, Khammam and later to Osmania General Hospital, Hyderabad where his right leg was amputated above knee level. A case in Crime No.33 of 1996 was registered by Sathupally police. The claimant pleads that on account of amputation of the right leg, he is unable to attend the work and thereby, deprived of his earning capacity. The driver and owner of the vehicle-respondent Nos.2 and 3 herein remained exparte. The appellant/insurer filed a counter opposing their claim and denying their liability to pay the compensation. During the enquiry, the claimant was examined as P.W.1 and Exs.A-1 to A-4 were marked on behalf of the claimant. No oral evidence was adduced by the respondents. Ex.B-1-copy of the insurance policy was marked on behalf of the appellant/insurer. On a consideration of the evidence available on record, the learned Tribunal held that the accident occurred due to the rash and negligent driving of the lorry bearing No.AAH 4554 by its driver. The Tribunal further held that the claimant is entitled for a total compensation of Rs.2,06,800/-. Aggrieved by the same, the present appeal is filed by the insurer. The finding of the Tribunal that the accident occurred due to the rash and negligent driving of the lorry by its driver, is not seriously disputed. It is also not disputed that the claimant suffered amputation of right leg upto knee level. The Tribunal, however, awarded various amounts under different heads and some of them appeared to be overlapping. The Tribunal has not made any effort to estimate the loss of earning capacity by applying the suitable multiplier and awarded lumpsum amount of Rs.50,000/- towards loss of future earnings, Rs.30,000/- towards loss of amenities of life, Rs.25,000/- towards compensation for the crush injury and Rs.50,000/- towards compensation for the amputation of the right leg. The claimant is aged 40 years and as per the second schedule, the suitable multiplier is “16”. The Tribunal has recorded a finding that the claimant was earning Rs.1,200/- per month and awarded a sum of Rs.4,800/- towards loss of past earnings for a period of four months. The said finding is not challenged by the claimant by filing any appeal or cross objections. Even otherwise, the income taken by the Tribunal at Rs.40/- per day for the claimant, who was working as a coolie at the time of accident, which occurred in 1996, is considered reasonable. It is also not disputed that the percentage of disability on account of amputation of the right leg upto knee has to be taken at 60% as per the provisions of the Workmen’s Compensation Act. Applying the multiplier “16” to the income at Rs.1,200 p.m., the loss of earning capacity taking the disability at 60% comes to Rs.1,38,240/-. The Tribunal awarded a sum of Rs.20,000/- towards pain and suffering, Rs.10,000/- towards medical expenses, Rs.10,000/- towards transport charges which are considered to be just and reasonable. Having regard to the nature of the injury suffered and the length of hospitalization and treatment undergone, the amount of Rs.4,800/- awarded by the Tribunal towards past earnings for a period of four months is also held reasonable. The Tribunal, however, did not award any amount towards attendant charges and extra nourishment. It is considered that having regard to the serious nature of the injury resulting in amputation which necessarily requires the claimant to have the assistance of someone at least during the period of hospitalization, it is considered that a sum of Rs.5,000/- towards attendant charges and Rs.2,000/- towards extra nourishment can be granted. The total amount of compensation payable to the claimant, therefore, works out to Rs.1,90,040/- which can be rounded off to Rs.1,90,000/-. The impugned Order is modified accordingly granting Rs.1,90,000/- towards compensation with interest at 9% p.a. from the date of the petition. In the result, the appeal is allowed to the extent stated above. There shall be no order as to costs. ____​______________ G. V. SEETHAPATHY, J 12th November, 2009 AMD