HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE R. KANTHA RAO C.M.A.NO.1746 OF 2001 Dated: 01.04.2010 BETWEEN: Ravipati Ravi .. Appellant And M/s Lakshmi Auto Carrier and another .. Respondents HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE R. KANTHA RAO C.M.A.NO.1746 OF 2001 JUDGMENT: This appeal is filed by the injured claimant against the order, dated 30.04.2001 passed by the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal- cum-IV Additional District Judge, Guntur in M.V.O.P.No.461 of 1998. 2. The appeal is filed assailing the order on the ground that the compensation granted is grossly inadequate and requires to be enhanced. Since the appeal filed relates to enhancement of compensation, the other aspects need not be gone into. 3. I have heard the learned counsel appearing for the appellant as well as the second respondent-insurance company. 4. The petitioner who is resident of Vijayawada, was aged 28 years on the date of accident, and he is said to be a businessman earning Rs.3,000/- per month. According to his evidence, the accident wherein the lorry bearing No.AP 9U 6948 was involved, the appellant sustained injuries and he underwent suturing of anal margin, catheterization of bladder and optical urethrotomy. He was treated in the hospital from 20.08.1997 to 02.10.1997 and was also treated by Dr. Vijaya Bhakar. 5. The doctor, who treated the appellant in Government General Hospital, Guntur was examined as PW.2. His evidence discloses that he treated the petitioner in his private clinic for suturing of anal margin, Optical Urethrotomy on 20.08.1997 and the petitioner was discharged from the hospital on 02.10.1997. It is also his evidence that he examined the appellant and found that the fracture was united and there is limitation of squatting and complaint of pain during rotations of hips. According to PW.2, the Urethral problem would be a continuous problem and it requires periodical dialatation which should be done by only Urologist and it is expensive. According to the assessment of the Urologist, who treated the appellant in the clinic of PW.2, the disability is 15 to 20%. There is no authenticated evidence regarding the disability sustained by the appellant. However, the learned Tribunal as against the claim of Rs.1,00,000/-, has granted compensation amount of Rs.50,000/- in lump sum considering all the above mentioned aspects. The learned Tribunal, however, did not award any amount specifically towards pain and suffering and considering the contention of the appellant, an amount of Rs.10,000/- can be granted towards pain and suffering and a further sum of Rs.5,000/- towards loss of amenities in life. In all, the appellant is entitled for compensation of Rs.65,000/-. The enhancement, therefore, would be Rs.15,000/- and the enhanced compensation shall carry interest at the rate of 6% per annum from the date of petition till the date of realisation. 6. With the above enhancement in the compensation, the appeal is partly allowed. There shall be no order as to costs. _______________ R.KANTHA RAO,J Dated: 15.04.2010 Kvrm