HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE GHULAM MOHAMMED C.M.A.NO. 3081 OF 2004 JUDGMENT: This Appeal under Section 173 of the Motor Vehicles Act 1988, is directed against the Judgment and Decree dated 25.8.2003 passed by the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal-cum-V Additional Chief Judge, City Civil Court, Hyderabad (for short ‘the Tribunal’) in OP No. 205 of 1999 filed by the claimant claiming compensation of Rs. 2,00,000/- for the injuries sustained in a motor vehicle accident that occurred on 16.02.1996 at about 12.30 PM when the claimant was travelling in the lorry bearing No. AP 28 T 4532 as its cleaner, on the road leading from Hyderabad to Nagarjunasagar, and when they reached Gungal Forest, the driver of the lorry drove the same in a rash and negligent manner as a result of which, the lorry turned turtle on the right side of the road and the claimant sustained fracture to his left hand, spinal cord, two legs paralyzed and received other injuries to all over his body. First respondent owner of the lorry did not file any counter and the second respondent-Insurance Company filed its counter denying the allegations made in the petition. 2. The Tribunal held that the accident occurred only due to rash and negligent driving of the lorry by its driver, therefore, both the respondents are jointly and severally liable to pay the compensation. As far as the quantum of compensation is concerned, the Tribunal awarded Rs. 75,124/- to the claimant with proportionate costs and interest at 9% per annum. Aggrieved by the same, the present Civil Miscellaneous Appeal is filed by the United India Insurance Company Limited. 3. The learned counsel appearing for the appellant-Insurance Company submits that the Tribunal erred in taking the salary of the claimant at 1,800/- per month when it is admitted that the salary is only Rs. 1500/-. He also submits that the Tribunal has failed to take the disability and it ought to have seen that the documentary and oral evidence adduced by the claimants would not establish the claim of the claimants. 4. On the other hand, the learned counsel appearing for the first respondent-claimant submits that the order of the Tribunal is quite reasonable and there is no need to interfere with the order passed by the Tribunal. 5. Heard the learned counsel appearing for both sides and also perused the entire material made available on record. 6. It is evident from the record that the accident occurred on 16.02.1996 at about 12.30 PM when the claimant was travelling in the lorry bearing No. AP 28 T 4532 as its cleaner on the road leading from Hyderabad to Nagarjunasagar, and when they reached Gungal Forest, the driver of the lorry drove the same in a rash and negligent manner as a result of which, the lorry turned turtle on the right side of the road and the claimant sustained fracture to his left hand, and also received other grievous injuries to all over his body. The Tribunal taking into consideration the evidence of PW-2, Orthopedic Surgeon who asserted in his cross-examination that the claimant sustained injuries, which lead to permanent disability, took the disability at 20% and assessed the compensation at Rs. 73,440/- and also granted Rs. 1,684/- towards medical expenses, totaling to Rs. 75,124/- with proportionate costs and interest at 9% per annum from the date of petition till the date of realization against both the respondents, who are jointly and severally liable to pay the compensation. Hence, I do not see any reason to interfere with the order passed by the Tribunal and the order passed is quite reasonable and the Civil Miscellaneous Appeal is liable to be dismissed. 7. Accordingly, the Civil Miscellaneous Appeal filed by the Insurance Company is dismissed. There shall be no order as to costs. __________________________ GHULAM MOHAMMED, J Date: 24.2.2011 KA