THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE P. SWAROOP REDDY C.M.A.No.1145 OF 1995 JUDGMENT: This civil miscellaneous appeal is filed by the claimant, who suffered injuries in a motor vehicle accident, against the order of the learned Additional Chief Judge, City Civil Court, Secunderabad, in O.P.No.155 of 1993. He claimed compensation of Rs.60,467.60ps. 2. Heard. 3. According to the petitioner, he was 38 years old, working as Junior Assistant in the second respondent Corporation on a salary of Rs.2,616.90ps. On 17.01.1991 at about 7.30p.m., while he was crossing road in front of Alfa Hotel, Secunderabad, R.T.C.bus bearing No.AAZ 4605 came in a rash and negligent manner and dashed him. He suffered fracture of pelvis. 4. The second respondent R.T.C. filed a counter denying the allegations in the petition saying that when the petitioner tried to board moving bus, he fell down and got injuries. On the basis of the above pleadings, the following issues were framed: 1. Whether the accident covered by this O.P.occurred on account of rash and negligent driving of the RTC bus bearing No.AAZ 4605 by its driver? 2. If so, whether the petitioner sustained grievous injuries and incurred permanent disability? 3. What is the just amount that can be awarded as compensation in favour of the petitioner and against whom? 4. To what relief? 5. On behalf of the petitioner, P.W.1 was examined and Exs.A1 to A17 were marked. On behalf of the respondents, R.W.1 was examined. Considering the material on record, the Court below granted compensation of Rs.12,000/-. 6. There is no dispute about the accident. Even R.W.1, the driver of the bus, spoke about the manner of the accident and there was no negligence on his part. As there is no dispute about the accident, the only question that needs to be answered is with regard to the quantum of compensation. 7. Now, the point for consideration is whether there are any grounds for enhancing the compensation? While answering issue No.2, the tribunal observed as follows: “As per Ex.A1 the hospital treatment certificate, the petitioner sustained fracture of inferior pubic ramus(L), C`disruption of pubic symphysis, that Ex.A4 OP ticket and Ex.A10 report of Radiology Department revealed that there was fracture of (L) Acetabulum, fracture of right pubic bone and dislocation of pubic bone joint.” Thus, it is a case, where the petitioner suffered fracture of pelvis, which is definitely a serious injury, causing permanent disability, which would take considerable time for healing also and would cause substantial pain. There appears to be some contributory negligence on the part of the petitioner also. As observed by the learned trial Judge, at the place of incident there was no possibility of the bus going in very high speed and hitting the victim. Though the petitioner would be entitled for entire compensation of Rs.60,000/- as claimed by him, on account of the contributory negligence on his part, I hold that an amount of Rs.10,000/- has to be deducted from out of it. Thus, the petitioner would be entitled to total compensation of Rs.50,000/- and the compensation is accordingly enhanced from Rs.12,000/- to Rs.50,000/-. The interest on the enhanced amount shall be @ 6% per annum. The petitioner can withdraw the entire amount as and when deposited. 8. Accordingly, the appeal is partly allowed. No costs. ______________________ P. SWAROOP REDDY, J. 23rd September 2010, Rns