HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE GHULAM MOHAMMED CMA No.608 of 2005 JUDGMENT: The claimant filed this appeal under Section 173 of the Motor Vehicles Act, dissatisfied with the compensation awarded by the Tribunal in OP No.2628 of 2002 in its order dated 9-12-2004 for the injuries sustained by him in the motor vehicle accident that occurred on 28-8-2002. 2. The facts in nutshell are that on 28-8-2002 at about 4-30 pm, when the claimant-appellant herein was returning to home by walk and when he reached the urinal stall at Balkampet, he stopped himself to attend to the calls of nature and at that time the motor cycle bearing no.AP 10S 1632 driven by its rider in a rash and negligent manner came from Balkampet side and hit the claimant, due to the impact of the same, the claimant sustained fracture of both bones of his right leg and he was immediately shifted to NIMS, Hyderabad, and there he underwent surgery. The claimant sought for compensation of Rs.1,50,000/- from the respondents on account of the accident. 3. To prove his claim, the claimant examined himself as PW-1. Ex.A-1 is the certified copy of the FIR. Ex.A-2 is the discharge record of NIMS, Ex.A-10 is the bunch of 47 medical bills and Ex.A-11 is the bunch of X-ray films. It has come in the evidence that the claimant could not attend to his work for the period of seven months on account of the injury sustained by him. The documents Ex.A-2 to A-8 amply establish that he was attending to NIMS hospital from 28-8-2002 to 14- 3-2003 for treatment. The Tribunal considering the age and avocation of the of the claimant and the nature of injuries sustained by him, granted total compensation of Rs.15,750/-. Aggrieved by the same, this appeal by the claimant. 4. Heard learned counsel appearing on both sides and perused the record. 5. In the instant case, though there is no disability certificate issued by the competent Medical Board, the affect of the injury sustained by the claimant in the day to day life including on his avocation cannot be lost sight of. The nature of injury suffered by the claimant can be noticed from Exs.A-2 to A-8. Though the doctor who treated the claimant was not examined, considering the fact that the claimant could not attend to his work for a period of seven months, an amount of Rs.20,000/- is granted towards injury, pain and suffering, Rs.10,000/- towards future loss of earnings, Rs.10,000/- towards loss of wages as labour, Rs.20,424/- towards medical bills, Rs.5,000/- towards extra nourishment and Rs.2,000/- towards transportation charges, totalling to Rs.67,424/- with interest at 7.5% per annum from the date of petition till the date of realization. 6. In the result, the appeal is partly allowed enhancing the compensation from Rs.16,000/- to Rs.67,424/- with interest at 7.5% per annum from the date of petition till the date of realization. __________________ GHULAM MOHAMMED, J 27-1-2011 Nrg.