HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE K.S. APPA RAO M.A.C.M.A.No. 469 of 2008 Date: 15-07-2011 Between: Benda Savithri ………. Appellant And Mr. M.A. Hafeez and another ………. Respondents HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE K.S. APPA RAO M.A.C.M.A.No.469 of 2008 ORDER: This Appeal is filed against the order, dated 09-05-2006 passed in O.P.No.248 of 2002 on the file of the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal (II Additional District Judge), Fast Track Court, Nizamabad. The appellant herein is the petitioner in the said O.P. 2. The brief facts of the case are that on 30-11-2001 at about 4-45 PM, while the petitioner was travelling in an auto bearing No.AP 25U 133 from Navipet towards Binola and when the auto reached near Gandhi Nagar village, the driver drove the auto in a rash and negligent manner at high speed and lost control over the auto and dashed it against a stone by the side of the road due to which the auto turned turtle and the petitioner sustained fractures to skull, ribs and right leg and injuries to left eye and other parts of the body. Immediately the petitioner was shifted to Government Hospital, Nizamabad, where she was treated as inpatient. Therefore, she filed the O.P. claiming compensation of Rs.1,50,000/- under all the heads. 3. During the course of trial, on behalf of the petitioner, she herself was examined as PW-1 and Exs.A-1 to A-3 were got marked. On behalf of the respondents, RW-1 was examined and Ex.B-1, insurance policy, was got marked. The Tribunal, after considering the oral and documentary evidence adduced on either side, came to the conclusion that the accident occurred due to rash and negligent driving of the auto by its driver and accordingly, allowed the O.P. in part granting the compensation of Rs.25,000/- with interest at 7.5% per annum from the date of petition till the date of realisation, and made respondents 1 and 2 liable to pay the compensation. Aggrieved thereby, the petitioner preferred the present appeal. 4. The learned counsel appearing for the appellant mainly urged that the amount of compensation granted by the Tribunal is very meagre and the Tribunal failed to grant compensation towards pain and suffering and therefore, requested for enhancement of compensation. 5. The learned counsel for the respondents, while supporting the order of the Tribunal, urged that there are no grounds for enhancement of compensation and sought for dismissal of the appeal. 6. Now the point for consideration is whether the petitioner is entitled for enhancement of compensation? 7. As seen from the impugned order, Ex.A-3, certified copy of the wound certificate, shows that the petitioner received four simple injuries in the shape of lacerations on the left eyebrow and left chick and abrasions on right knee and she was treated in Government Hospital, Nizamabad from 30-11-2000 to 03-12-2000. Though admittedly the aforesaid injuries are simple in nature, the lacerated injuries on the left eyebrow and left cheek certainly will cause some pain and suffering. In the impugned order, the Tribunal granted the compensation of Rs.20,000/- for the said simple injuries and Rs.5,000/- towards treatment expenditure which, in my view, is quite just and reasonable. However, the Tribunal did not grant any compensation towards pain and suffering. 8. Therefore, taking into consideration the gravity of the injuries, it is just and reasonable to grant an amount of Rs.5,000/- to the petitioner towards pain and suffering. Accordingly, in total, the petitioner is entitled to the compensation of Rs.30,000/-. 9. In the result, the M.A.C.M.A. is allowed in part enhancing the compensation from Rs.25,000/- to Rs.30,000/-. The enhanced amount shall carry interest @7.5% per annum from the date of petition till the date of realisation. No order as to costs. _______________ K.S. APPA RAO, J Date: 15-07-2011 YCR