HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE P. SWAROOP REDDY M.A.C.M.A. No.1353 OF 2005 JUDGMENT: Being dissatisfied with the quantum of compensation awarded in M.V.O.P. No.331 of 2003 vide judgment dated 01-02-2005 by the learned Chairman, Motor Accident Claims Tribunal – cum – IV Additional District Judge, Kurnool, claimant preferred this Civil Miscellaneous Appeal seeking enhancement of compensation. 2. The owner of the lorry bearing No.AP5 – X – 2912 involved in the accident and its insurer are respondent Nos.1 and 2 respectively in the M.V.O.P. before the Tribunal. 3. For the sake of convenience, the parties are referred to as arrayed in the M.V.O.P. 4. The case of the claimant before the Tribunal is that on 09-11-2002 while he boarded the lorry bearing No.AP5 – X – 2912 along with other coolies for unloading the sand at Telugu Ganga Reservoir, at about 12-30 PM, near the bund of the reservoir, driver of the lorry drove it in a rash and negligent manner and high speed and lost control over the lorry, as a result, lorry fell down, due to which claimant along with other coolies fell down and sustained injuries. Claimant sustained injuries to his left thigh and ribs. Immediately, he was shifted to Government Hospital, Nandyal and from there he was shifted to Government General Hospital, Kurnool for better treatement where he was treated as inpatient for 15 days and thereafter he took treatement from the private doctors. He was aged 40 years and as a coolie was earning Rs.120/- a day. He spent Rs.20,000/- towards medical expenses etc. Due to the injuries, he is unable to attend to coolie work. Hence, he claimed a compensation of Rs.1,30,000/-. 5. Both the respondents filed their counters separately denying the case of the claimant and also their liability for payment of compensation. 6. Based on the pleadings, the following issues were framed for trial by the Tribunal: “(1) Whether the accident occurred on 9.11.2002 at about 12.30 noon was due to the rash and negligent driving of the lorry bearing No.AP-5X-2912 by its driver belonging to first respondent? (2) Whether the petitioner is entitled to claim compensation, if so to what amount and from which of the respondents? (3) To what relief?” 7. To prove his case, claimant got examined himself as PW.1 and got marked Exs.A-1 to A-3. On behalf of the respondents, except marking a copy of the insurance policy of the offending lorry as Ex.B-1 with the consent of the claimant, no oral evidence was adduced. 8. Based on the evidence on record and after an elaborate consideration of the same, Tribunal awarded a compensation of Rs.15,000/- to the claimant against both the respondents to pay the compensation jointly and severally with interest at 9% per annum. Being dissatisfied with the quantum of compensation, claimant preferred this appeal seeking enhancement of compensation. 9. Since neither of the respondents preferred any appeal or cross-objections, there is no need to go into the question of proving the accident and their liability for payment of compensation. 10. Hence, the only point that arises for consideration in this appeal is whether the compensation awarded by the Tribunal to the claimant is inadequate ? 11. As seen from Ex.A-3 wound certificate, claimant sustained two fractures and out of that one is fracture of left pubic ramie and another one is fracture of left side ribs from 2nd to 6th, to which Tribunal awarded a sum of Rs.15,000/-, which include Rs.1,000/- towards medical expenses. 12. Since the claimant sustained fracture of pubic ramie and fracture of ribs, I am of the view that the compensation awarded by the Tribunal is too low. Due to the fracture of leg and ribs, claimant must have spent substantial amount towards medicines, transportation, extra nourishment, he must have been out of work at least for a period of two months and must have suffered pain. Further, he must have suffered some permanent disability due to the fracture of leg though not because of the fracture of ribs. In the circumstances, I am of the view that awarding a total compensation of Rs.75,000/- (Rupees seventy five thousand only) to the claimant would meet the needs of justice for the fracture of pelvic and ribs and consequent pain and disability and the same is accordingly awarded. 13. Thus, the compensation of Rs.15,000/- awarded by the Tribunal to the claimant is enhanced to Rs.75,000/-. The rate of interest on the enhanced compensation shall be at 6% per annum from the date of O.P. till realization. The claimant is permitted to withdraw 50% of the enhanced compensation along with accrued interest proportionately soon after its deposit and the remaining 50% two years thereafter. 14. With the above enhancement in quantum of compensation and directions, the appeal is allowed in part. No order as to costs. ____________________ P. SWAROOP REDDY, J December 3, 2010. PV