THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE N.R.L.NAGESWARA RAO M.A.C.M.A. No. 2680 of 2011 JUDGMENT: The appeal is filed against the judgment dated 23.02.2005 in O.P.No.1022 of 2001 on the file of the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal- cum-IV Additional District Judge (Fast Track Court), Nizamabad. The petitioner was minor aged about 7 years and said to have received injuries in a motor accident on 16.04.2001 at about 11.45 A.M. when he was coming to the house, a scooter bearing No.AP-25- B-3055 came in a rash and negligent manner and dashed against the petitioner, as a result of which, he received multiple injuries and he was treated in hospital and claimed a compensation of Rs.1,50,000/- against the 1st respondent, who is the owner, and the 2nd respondent, which is the insurance company, jointly and severally. The 1st respondent remained ex parte. The 2nd respondent, which is the insurance company, filed written statement denying the petition averments, nature of accident, nature of injuries and its liability. After considering the evidence on record, the lower Tribunal found that the manner of accident and the nature of injuries received by the petitioner is correct and granted a compensation of Rs.48,500/-. Aggrieved by the said judgment dated 23.02.2005, the present appeal is filed. The point for consideration is whether the quantum of compensation granted by the lower Tribunal is just and reasonable? POINT: As can be seen from the wound certificate Ex.A-3, the petitioner sustained contusion over the upper lip, abrasion of forehead, swelling and tenderness of right femur and x-ray shown fracture of right femur and he was said to have been discharged from the hospital on 24.04.2001. The case sheet is also marked as Ex.X-1 and P.W.2, who treated the petitioner at Government Hospital, Nizamabad, stated that there is a disability of 20%. The lower Tribunal has taken into consideration Exs.A-3 and A-1, came to the conclusion that there are two grievous injuries i.e. fracture of right femur and loss of upper teeth and another simple injury. However, according to the petitioner, the quantum of compensation fixed by the lower Tribunal is less. According to him, though there is confinement in hospital and the nature of injuries received by the minor petitioner caused inconvenience, there is no proper compensation for the disability and also the medical expenses were not properly taken into consideration. According to him, the compensation towards pain and suffering is also not proper. Evidently, the factum of incident and the nature of the injuries received by the petitioner show that he received two grievous injuries and the injury to the teeth and right femur will cause inconvenience for a longer time. Therefore, taking into consideration the above fact, the quantum of compensation granted by the lower Tribunal does not appear to be just and I feel the ends of justice would meet, if the compensation of Rs.75,000/- is granted. Therefore, the compensation granted by the lower Tribunal is enhanced to Rs.75,000/- (Rupees seventy five thousand only). With the above modification, the appeal is allowed. No costs. ________________________ N.R.L.NAGESWARA RAO, J 11-11-2011 MR THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE N.R.L.NAGESWARA RAO M.A.C.M.A. No. 2680 of 2011 DATE: 11-11-2011 MR