IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD THURSDAY, THE TWENTY THIRD DAY OF DECEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND TEN PRESENT THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE P. SWAROOP REDDY CIVIL MISCELLANEOUS APPEAL NO.3162 OF 2003 Between : Shaik John .... APPELLANT A N D Nune Lakshmi and another . …RESPONDENTS THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE P. SWAROOP REDDY CIVIL MISCELLANEOUS APPEAL No.3162 OF 2003 JUDGMENT: This Civil Miscellaneous Appeal is filed by the claimant against the Order and decree in M.V.O.P.No.224 of 1999, dated 21.04.2003, passed by the learned Chairman, Motor Accident Claims Tribunal – cum – II Additional District Judge, Guntur, whereby a compensation of Rs.66,500/- was awarded to the claimant as against his claim of Rs.1,45,000/-. 2. Appellant, is the claimant, respondent No.1 is owner of the tractor trailor, respondent No.2, is insurer of the tractor trailor involved in the accident, before the Tribunal. 3. For the sake of convenience, the parties herein are referred to as arrayed in the O.P. before the Tribunal. The case of the claimant in the O.P. before the Tribunal, in brief, is that on 21-02-1999 at about 10:30 P.M., while petitioner was walking on the left side of the road in Macherla Town, in order to go to his sister’s house, the Tractor Trailor bearing No.AP-26-T-6014 and AP- 26-T-6015, came in opposite direction in a rash and negligent manner and dashed the petitioner and the tyre of the Trailor ran over the right ankle of the claimant. As a result, the petitioner received crush injury to his right ankle joint. Thereafter he was shifted to Government Hospital, Macherla and from there he was shifted to Government Hospital, Guntur, where he underwent treatment as inpatient. The Police Macherla registered a case in Crime No.22 of 1999 under Section 337 I.P.C. against the driver of the Tractor Trailor. 4. Respondent No.1 remained ex parte. Respondent No.2, United India Insurance Company Limited, alone filed its counter denying the case of the claimant. 5. On the basis of the pleadings, the following issues were framed by the Tribunal for trial: “1. Whether the accident occurred due to rash and negligent driving of the driver of Tractor and Trailor bearing registration No.AP-26-T-6014 and AP-26-T-6015? 2. To what compensation the petitioner is entitled and from whom? 3. To what relief? 6. To substantiate his case, claimant got examined himself as PW.1 and examined the Doctor who treated him as P.W.2 and got marked Exs.A-1 to A-7. On behalf of respondent No.2, R.W.1 was examined and Exs.B.1 to B.7 were marked. 7. On the basis of the material available on record, the Tribunal granted a sum of Rs.3000/- towards medical expenses, special diet and attendant charges; Rs.5000/- towards pain and suffering; Rs.58,500/- towards loss of income during treatment as well as in future. In all, the Tribunal awarded a sum of Rs.66,500/-. 8. Now the point that arises for consideration is whether the petitioner is entitled for enhancement of compensation? 9. The Tribunal at para No.15 of the order observed that the petitioner suffered dislocation of right ankle joint apart from other injuries. There was restriction of movement of right ankle joint with deformity of foot. The deformity of foot cannot become normal even if it is healed. The limp will be present throughout his life. The Tribunal awarded compensation towards permanent disability and injuries sustained by him. Considering all these aspects, apart from the amount already granted by the Tribunal below, the claimant can be awarded further amount of Rs.33,500/- 10. Accordingly, the Civil Miscellaneous Appeal is partly allowed enhancing the compensation from Rs.66,500/- to Rs.1,00,000/-. The additional amount shall carry interest at 6% per annum from the date of filing of O.P. before the Tribunal till realization. There shall be no order as to costs. _________________________ P. SWAROOP REDDY, J. DECEMBER 23, 2010. YVL