IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF ANDHRA PRADESH : HYDERABAD THURSDAY, THE TWENTY SECOND DAY OF SEPTEMBER, TWO THOUSAND AND ELEVEN Present: HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE G.V.SEETHAPATHY M.A.C.M.A.No.728 OF 2008 Between: Poloji Narayana … Appellant And: Ravi and another … Respondents HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE G.V.SEETHAPATHY M.A.C.M.A.No.728 OF 2008 JUDGMENT: This appeal is directed against the judgment dated 25.10.2007 O.P.No.549 of 2004, on the file of the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal (V-Additional District Judge, Fast Track Court), (for short ‘the Tribunal’), Nizamabad, wherein the said claim application filed by the appellant herein for compensation, was allowed-in-part, awarding compensation of Rs.48,000/- with interest at 7.5% per annum from the date of petition. 2. Heard the learned counsel for the appellant/claimant and the learned counsel for the 2nd respondent/insurer. Perused the record. 3. The appellant herein filed the claim application under Section 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act seeking compensation of Rs.3 lakhs for the injuries sustained by him in a motor vehicle accident that occurred on 16.03.2004. According to the claimant, on that day, he was travelling in a jeep bearing No.AP 25 T 6253 from Nadapur to Nizamabad and on the way near Chand Dhaba, on account of rash and negligent driving of the jeep by its driver, the vehicle overturned, resulting in multiple fractures and other injuries to the claimant and that he was shifted to Sri Venkateswara Hospital, Nizamabad where his left leg was operated upon and a rod was inserted. 4. The 1st respondent-owner of the vehicle remained ex parte and the 2nd respondent-insurer filed a counter opposing the claim and denying their liability to pay the compensation. 5. During enquiry, P.Ws.1 & 2 were examined and Exs.A-1 to A-7 were marked on behalf of the claimant. No oral evidence was adduced, but Exs.B-1 to B-4 were marked on behalf of the 2nd respondent-insurer. 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 jeep by its driver. The Tribunal further held that the claimant is entitled for a total compensation of Rs.48,000/- with interest at 7.5% per annum. Not satisfied with the award, the claimant filed the present appeal, seeking enhancement of the compensation. 7. The main contention of the learned counsel for the appellant is that the Tribunal has not awarded any amount towards permanent disability and erred in awarding a meagre amount of Rs.48,000/-, though the claimant sustained three fracture injuries and underwent surgery and was in hospital for 90 days. The medical evidence of P.W.2 coupled with the wound certificate Ex.A-3 and prescriptions Exs.A-4 disclose that the claimant sustained multiple fracture injuries i.e., fracture or right wrist, fracture of right shoulder and left leg which are all grievous and lacerated injury on parietal region and multiple abrasions on medial side which are simple in nature. P.W.2 testified that he examined P.W.1 and issued the certificate Ex.A-3 and also the prescriptions Ex.A-4. The evidence on record also shows that the claimant has undergone treatment in Sri Venkateswara Hospital and he was operated upon. 8. Having regard to the nature of the injuries sustained by the claimant and the treatment undergone by him, the claimant is held entitled for a sum of Rs.18,000/- towards pain and suffering which is awarded by the Tribunal. The amount of Rs.21,000/- awarded by the Tribunal towards medical expenses, extra diet and attendant charges is, however, on the lower side. Though the claimant has not filed any medical bills, in view of the multiple fracture injuries sustained by him, it is considered reasonable to award a sum of Rs.10,000/- towards medical expenses and Rs.5,000/- towards extra diet and Rs.10,000/- towards attendant charges. The claimant is said to be a daily wage earner as a maistry. In view of the injuries sustained by him, he must have necessarily incurred loss of earnings for a period of at least three months at the rate of Rs.150/- per day. The claimant is, therefore, held entitled for a compensation of Rs.13,500/- towards loss of earnings. The claimant is also held entitled for a sum of Rs.3,500/- towards transport charges. 9. The claimant has not adduced any evidence to show that the injuries have led to any permanent disability resulting in loss of earning capacity. The evidence of P.W.2 does not disclose any such permanent disability incurred by the claimant as a result of injures sustained by him in the accident. The claimant has also not filed any disability certificate issued by a competent medical board. Under those circumstances, the claim made on the ground of permanent disability, remains totally unsubstantiated. 10. In the circumstances, the claimant is held entitled for a total compensation of Rs.60,000/- with interest at 7.5% per annum on the original amount awarded by the Tribunal from the date of petition and at 6% per annum on the enhanced amount from the date of appeal. The impugned order is modified accordingly. 11. In the result, the civil miscellaneous appeal is allowed to the extent stated above. There shall be no order as to costs. ________________________ G.V.SEETHAPATHY, J 22nd September 2011 Lrkm