THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE G.V.SEETHAPATHY MOTOR ACCIDENTS CIVIL MISCELLANEOUS APPEAL No.21 OF 2008 DATED: 13-08-2010 JUDGMENT: This appeal is directed against the order, dated 04-04-2007, in O.P.No.475 OF 2003 on the file of the learned Chairman, MACT-cum-IV Additional District Judge (FTC), Nizamabad, wherein the claim of the appellant herein was allowed in part awarding compensation of Rs.50,000/- with interest @ 6% p.a. from the date of petition till the date of deposit. 2. Heard learned counsel for the appellant and the learned counsel for the respondents. Perused the record. 3. Appellant filed the claim application seeking compensation of Rs.2,00,000/- for the injuries sustained by him in a motor vehicle accident that occurred on 17-12-2002 at Nizamabad. According to him, he along with others was travellling in an auto bearing No.AP-25-U- 2123 from Armoor to Nizamabad and when the auto reached in front of Vijaya Public School, the driver on account of rash and negligent driving dashed against one jeep bearing No.AP-9P-923 coming in the opposite direction, as a result of which the claimant sustained fracture injuries to nose and ribs besides other injuries. The claimant was shifted to Government hospital, Nizamabad for treatment. A case in Cr.No.265 of 2002 is registered against the driver of the auto by the Nizamabad Rural police. The 1st respondent filed a written statement and the 2nd respondent filed a separate written statement opposing the claim and denying their liability. 4. On the strength of the pleadings, the Tribunal framed the following issues. 1. Whether the accident has taken place due to rash and negligent driving of the vehicle Auto bearing No.AP-25-U-2123 by its driver? 2. Whether the petitioner is entitled for compensation, if so, to what just amount and against whom? 3. To what relief? 5. During enquiry, P.W.1 was examined and Exs.A1 to A6 were marked on behalf of the claimant. R.W.1 was examined and Ex. B1-copy of the policy was marked on behalf of the respondents. Exs.X1 and X2 were marked. 6. On a consideration of the evidence available on record, the Tribunal held that the accident occurred due to the rash and negligent driving of the auto by its driver. The Tribunal also held that the claimant is entitled for a total compensation of Rs.50,000/-. Accordingly, award was passed with interest @ 6% p.a. Not satisfied with the same, the claimant preferred the present appeal seeking enhancement. 7. As seen from the main award, the medical evidence on record established that the claimant sustained fracture of mandible and crack fracture of tibia right. In fact, the doctor who treated the claimant was not examined and based on the wound certificate-Ex.A3 and Case Sheet- Ex.X1, the Tribunal has awarded compensation for the injury sustained by the claimant. However, as there is no appeal filed by the respondents, the finding recorded by the Tribunal regarding the injury sustained by the claimant cannot be interfered with in this appeal. 8. Having regard to the nature of the injuries, the Tribunal awarded Rs.10,000/- for the two fracture injuries and Rs.1000/- for the simple injury which is in accordance with II Schedule of the Motor Vehicles Act. Besides that, the Tribunal also awarded Rs.10,000/- towards medical expenses though the claimant filed only two bills under Ex.A6. The Tribunal also awarded Rs.25,000/- towards pain and suffering. Having regard to the fact that the claimant was treated in the Government hospital for about fifteen days, the Tribunal also awarded a sum of Rs.4000/- towards transportation and extra nourishment charges. Thus a total compensation of Rs.50,000/- was awarded. The Tribunal has awarded compensation under all the relevant heads. Having regard to the nature of the injuries and in view of the fact that the claimant sustained only two grievous injuries and one simple injury and he was in hospital only for fifteen days, the award passed by the Tribunal granting a total compensation of Rs.50,000/- is considered to be just and reasonable. There are no valid or sufficient grounds for enhancement of the compensation. 9. In the result, the appeal is dismissed. There shall be no order as to costs. _______________________ G.V.SEETHAPATHY, J 13th August, 2020 Tsy