HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE N.R.L. NAGESWARA RAO M.A.C.M.A. No.2300 OF 2011 JUDGMENT: The appeal is filed by the appellant/claimant against the order in O.P.No.1048 of 1998 on the file of the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal (District Judge) at Nizamabad, questioning the quantum of compensation. 2. The claimant filed the petition claiming compensation of Rs.2,50,000/- for the injuries said to have been received in the motor accident. 3. According to the case of the petitioner, on 14.10.1998 when he was driving the auto trolley bearing No.AP 1/T 1793 from Sone towards Nirmal and reached near Ganjal village shivar on Hyderabad to Nagpur High way No.7 road at about 6.30 p.m., one Tata Sumo bearing No.AP 1/D 669 came in a rash and negligent manner and dashed against the auto trolley of the petitioner, as a result of which, he received multiple injuries and suffered disability. The 1st respondent is owner of the Tata Sumo and the 2nd respondent is Insurance Company. The 2nd respondent filed a counter contending that the incident was due to the fault of the petitioner and there is no rashness and negligence on the part of the driver of the Tata Sumo. The nature of the injuries, nature of the treatment and quantum of compensation are disputed. After considering the evidence on record, the lower Tribunal has granted a compensation of Rs.88,608/-. Aggrieved by the said award, the present appeal is filed. 4. The point that arises for consideration is whether the amount of compensation granted by the lower Tribunal is just and proper? 5. POINT: The Insurance Company has not disputed the award. From the evidence on record, the petitioner has received injuries in a motor accident and the driver of the Tata Sumo was charge sheeted. The lower Tribunal has taken into consideration the petitioner has received fracture of lower end of radius and he was operated twice and also received simple injuries. The Tribunal has granted compensation on all components including the damages to the auto, medical expenses, loss of earnings and disability. But, however, towards pain and suffering only a sum of Rs.5,000/- was granted. Evidently, the petitioner has sustained a fracture and underwent operation and there are also simple injuries. Therefore, taking into consideration the same, I feel the quantum of compensation granted towards pain and suffering is not just and reasonable and the ends of justice would meet if the total compensation is fixed at Rs.1,00,000/-. Point is answered accordingly. In the result, the appeal is allowed in part. There shall be no order as to costs. _______________________________ JUSTICE N.R.L. NAGESWARA RAO Date: 11.10.2011 INL