HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE GHULAM MOHAMMED C.M.A. No :1626 of 2003 JUDGMENT: Aggrieved by the order dated 25.7.2002 of the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal-cum-III Additional Chief Judge, City Civil Court, Hyderabad, in O.P. No.1348 of 2001, the appellant-injured claimant filed the present appeal. The brief facts of the case are that on 11.6.2001 at about 8.00 P.M. and near Annaram gate when the appellant was proceeding in an auto bearing No. AP 11V 3442 belonging to the 1st respondent, which was insured with the 2nd respondent from Shadnagar, the auto driver drove the auto in a rash and negligent manner and with high speed and dashed against a stationed lorry bearing No. AP 21 V 4169. As a result, the appellant sustained injuries. Immediately, he was shifted to Shadnagar Government Hospital and from there to Osmania General Hospital, Hyderabad, where he was treated as an in-patient from 12.6.2001 to 26.6.2001. Further, a case in Crime No. 180 of 2001 was also registered against the driver of the auto. It is stated that by virtue of the injuries sustained by him in the said accident, the appellant was not in a position to attend to his profession, i.e., tailoring and therefore, he filed the claim petition claiming compensation of Rs. 1,00,000/- together with interest at 24% per annum. The driver of the auto remained ex-parte. The 2nd respondent has filed a counter affidavit before the Tribunal stating that the appellant failed to implead the owner and insurer of the lorry, with which the auto in which the appellant was travelling was hit. It further contended that the compensation amount claimed by the appellant is excessive and exorbitant. Based on the above pleadings, the following issues were settled for trial. 1. Whether the accident occurred out of the use of the motor vehicle belonging to respondent No.1 ? 2. Whether the petitioner is entitled to compensation ? If so, to what amount and from which of the respondents ? 3. To what relief ? Before the Tribunal, on behalf of the appellant-claimant, P.Ws. 1 and 2 were examined and Exs. A1 to A8 were marked. On behalf of the 2nd respondent, R.Ws. 1 and 2 were examined and Exs. B1 and B2 were marked. On a perusal of the oral and documentary evidence, the Tribunal came to the conclusion that the accident occurred due to the rash and negligent driving on the part of the driver of the auto belonging to the 1st respondent. However, while disbelieving the version of the applicant that he lost his earnings to an extent of Rs. 18,000/- by virtue of the injuries sustained by him in the accident and also the claim of the appellant with regard to loss of future earnings to an extent of Rs. 53,000/-, the Tribunal granted a lumpsum amount of Rs. 27,000/- as compensation. Being dissatisfied with the amount of compensation awarded by the Tribunal, the injured claimant filed the present appeal. Learned counsel appearing for the appellant- claimant contended that the Tribunal has not appreciated the medical evidence in proper perspective and erroneously granted a very meagre amount of Rs. 27,000/- as compensation. He further contended that the Tribunal failed to take into consideration Exs. A3 to A7, which are the wound certificate, x ray report, disability certificate, medical bills and discharge summary etc., filed by him while assessing the compensation amount and erred in observing that the appellant has spent only Rs. 4,000/- towards medical expenses. Learned counsel further contended that though the appellant sustained 65% disability, the Tribunal has not granted any amount towards loss of earnings and loss of future disability. Hence the compensation granted by the Tribunal needs to be enhanced. On the other hand, learned counsel for the 2nd respondent contended that the Tribunal after considering the evidence on record, granted an amount of Rs. 15,000/- towards pain and suffering and Rs. 4,000/- for the medical expenses incurred by him, besides granting an amount of Rs. 4,000/- towards extra nourishment. He further contended that when the appellant failed to examine the doctor, who issued Ex.A5, disability Certificate, the Tribunal rightly disbelieved his claim and there are no grounds to enhance the compensation amount. So far as the allegation with regard to rash and negligent driving on the part of the driver of the auto is concerned, the same remains unchallenged. The only question, which needs to be considered is whether the appellant is entitled for enhanced amount of compensation over and above Rs. 27,000/- ? There is no dispute about the fact that the appellant sustained injury to his left thigh. According to the appellant, prior to the accident, he was working as a tailor and was getting about Rs. 3,000/- per month and by virtue of the injury sustained by him, the appellant could not attend to tailoring work for a period of six months and claimed an amount of Rs.18,000/- towards loss of earnings. However, on the ground that the appellant did not place any material to show that he was earning that much amount, the Tribunal declined to grant any amount under this head. Even though the appellant did not file any material to show that he was getting that much amount, but, however while taking the average monthly income of the appellant as 1500/-, I award an amount of Rs.9,000/- under this head. Even though the appellant pleaded that he sustained 65% disability, the Tribunal disbelieved the same on the ground that P.W.2, is not the actual doctor, who treated the appellant injured. Admittedly, when Ex.A5 has been issued by P.W.2, who is a qualified and competent medical practitioner, the Tribunal ought not to have disbelieved the same. In the circumstances, I deem it appropriate to award an amount of Rs.65,000/- towards permanent disability. In addition to this, the appellant is entitled to Rs. 15,000/- towards pain and suffering; Rs.4,000/- towards medical expenses; Rs.4,000/- towards extra nourishment and Rs. 3,000/- towards transport charges & Rs.1,000/- towards damages for clothes as awarded by the Tribunal. In all, the appellant is entitled for an amount of Rs. 1,01,000/- which is rounded off to Rs.1,00,000/-. The enhanced amount of compensation shall carry interest at 7.5% per annum from the date of petition till the date of realization. The appeal is allowed to the extent indicated above. No costs. __________________________ GHULAM MOHAMMED,J DATE: 15th July, 2010 pnb