HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE P. SWAROOP REDDY CIVIL MISCELLANEOUS APPEAL No.1295 of 2002 JUDGMENT: This Civil Miscellaneous Appeal is filed by the claimant in M.V.O.P.No.62 of 1997 on the file of the Motor Vehicle Accidents Claims Tribunal-cum-II Addl. District Judge, Kurnool, being not satisfied with the quantum of compensation awarded by the Court below, by judgment dated 13.11.1998. 2. The facts, in brief, are as follows: The appellant is the driver of A.P.S.R.T.C. bus bearing No.AP 9Z 8426. On 09.11.1996 at about 11.50 a.m., while he was driving the bus, a city bus bearing No.ADO 6567 came in opposite direction in high speed and dashed against the bus. As a result of which, he sustained multiple injuries all over his body. Immediately after the accident, he was shifted to the Government General Hospital, Kurnool where he underwent treatment from 09.11.1996 to 18.11.1996 and thereafter he was treated as an out-patient in a private Nursing Home. He spent Rs.11,000/- for treatment. The 1st respondent is the Owner and the 2nd respondent is the Insurer of the offending city bus. A claim petition was accordingly filed seeking compensation of Rs.50,000/-. 3. The 2nd respondent-Insurance Company filed counter denying the allegations made in the claim petition and contending that the compensation claimed is excessive. 4. Basing on the above pleadings, the Court below framed the following issues: 1) Whether the accident occurred on 09.11.1996 due to rash and negligent driving of the city bus bearing No.ADO 6567? 2) Whether the petitioner is entitled to receive compensation, and if so, to what amount and against which of the respondents? 5. On behalf of the appellant-claimant, the appellant himself was examined as P.W.1 and Exs.A.1 to A.4 were marked. On behalf of the Insurance Company, Ex.B.1, copy of Insurance Policy, was marked. 6. There is no dispute with regard to the accident. The evidence of P.W.1 is that immediately after the accident, he was admitted to the Government General Hospital, Kurnool, where he underwent treatment as an inpatient for nine days and as an out-patient for one month. Thereafter, again he was admitted to the said Government Hospital and he was inpatient for twenty days and surgery was performed twice. He spent Rs.15,000/- for medicines. But, the appellant did not choose to examine the doctors, who treated him, in support of his case. Moreover, no documentary evidence is placed before the Court to the effect that he suffered fracture and took treatment in a private hospital. Ex.A.2 wound certificate shows that the injuries sustained by the appellant are simple in nature. The X-ray reveals no fracture. 7. In the above circumstances, I am of the view that the compensation awarded by the Court below is appropriate and reasonable and it is not a case to enhance the compensation. 8. Accordingly, the Civil Miscellaneous Appeal is dismissed. _________________________ P. SWAROOP REDDY, J. 30th June, 2010 cbs HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE P. SWAROOP REDDY CIVIL MISCELLANEOUS APPEAL No.1295 of 2002 (Dismissed) DATE:30.06.2010 cbs