THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE VILAS V. AFZULPURKAR CIVIL MISCELLANEOUS APPEAL No. 3160 of 1998 JUDGMENT: This appeal is by the claimant seeking enhancement of compensation. 2. The appellant was injured in an accident, which occurred on 22.02.1993, when the appellant was going on his cycle on the left side of the road margin the offending lorry bearing No. ABK 3996 came on the wrong side and hit the appellant resulting in serious injuries to the appellant. The police registered Cr.No.41 of 1993 at P.S., Chilakaluripet town and took up investigation. The appellant filed the present claim being MVOP.No.259 of 1993 seeking compensation of Rs.1,00,000/-. On evidence, on issue No.1, the Claims Tribunal found rash and negligent driving on the part of the first respondent and held that the first respondent and consequently, the insurer, second respondent, are liable for compensation. To the extent of the quantum of compensation the Tribunal below found and awarded a sum of Rs.5,000/- towards medical expenses and extra nourishment, a sum of Rs.2,000/- towards pain and suffering, a sum of Rs.1,000/- towards damage to the cycle of the appellant and the pecuniary compensation was assessed at Rs.34,540/-. However, the operative portion of the Judgment of the Claims Tribunal and in decree the total amount awarded is shown as Rs.34,540/- only. Aggrieved by the said award and to the extent of the disallowed claim the present appeal is filed. 3. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel for the respondent. 4. Apart form the arithmetic mistake in the award of the Tribunal below, in excluding the amount awarded towards medical expenses, pain and suffering as well as compensation for the vehicle, the learned counsel for the appellant has submitted that the evidence of PW.2, who was the Assistant Professor of Orthopedics and who treated the appellant, was not taken into consideration. He also submits that the disability as assessed by the doctor is to the extent of 20 to 25%, which has not been taken into consideration. The fixation of 15% as disability by the Tribunal below is, therefore, contrary to the evidence of the PW.2. He also submits that the amount awarded towards medical expenses and nourishment is too low considering the fact that the appellant was hospitalized for about 40 days and has to live with disability. Further, the amount awarded towards pain and suffering is also too low considering the number of injuries the appellant suffered in the said accident. 5. Learned counsel for the respondent supports the award and contends that the estimate on damages as awarded by the Tribunal below is just and reasonable and based on the evidence. 6. The point that arises for consideration, therefore, is whether the compensation awarded by the Claims Tribunal below is just and fair compensation? 7. It is evident from the evidence of PW.2 that the appellant had suffered five injuries out of which three were grievous. He has undergone treatment for fracture to the elbow, lateral epicondyle of right humerus, right scapula and neck of the right scapula. In the surgery, which the appellant has undergone in the hospital of Dr. Kolla Ramamohan Rao at Chilakaluripet, the fracture of lateral epicondyle of right humerus was also corrected. On account of these injuries and in spite of the surgery, the appellant is said to be unable to lift heavy weight with the right hand and it is making it difficult for him to attend agricultural operation and his avocation as an agriculturist. It is also stated that the appellant required prolonged hospitalization on account of this treatment and though part of the treatment was at the Government hospital at Guntur, the rest of the treatment including the surgery was at a private nursing home of Dr. K. Ramamohan Rao as stated above. The disability as certified by PW.2 is 20 – 25% and as such the Tribunal below applying the multiplicand of 15% to the earnings, assessed at Rs.10,800/-, is clearly not justified. Keeping in view the age of the appellant as 27 years on the date of accident and applying the ratio of the decision of the Supreme Court in Genral Manager, Kerala State Road Transport Corporation, Trivendrum v. Susamma Thomas[1], the compensation awarded by the Tribunal below with regard to the pecuniary damages and loss of future earnings at Rs.34,540/-, therefore, deserves an appropriate enhancement. Keeping in view the circumstances, the said amount shall stand enhanced to Rs.50,000/- and further the compensation towards medical expenses and extra nourishment at Rs.5,000/- awarded by the Tribunal below also deserves enhancement to Rs.15,000/- and to the extent of pain and suffering only Rs.2,000/- was awarded, but considering the nature of injuries and prolonged hospitalization of the appellant the said amount also deserves an enhancement of Rs.15,000/-. 8. The appeal is, therefore, allowed in part enhancing the compensation on future earning from Rs.34,540/- to Rs.50,000/-, medical expenses and extra nourishment from Rs.5,000/- to Rs.15,000/- and compensation for pain and suffering from Rs.2,000/- to Rs.15,000/-. The said enhanced amount shall also carry interest at the rate of 6% per annum from the date of claim till realization. 9. Further, the entire awarded amount was directed to be kept in fixed deposit by the Tribunal below, that order was passed on 08.09.1998, now almost more than 10 years have passed. Keeping in view the fact that the appellant would be needing the aforesaid amount, as he has already advanced in age, it is appropriate that the appellant is permitted to withdraw the entire amount together with interest as accrued thereon without furnishing any security. Accordingly, the appeal is allowed in part. There shall be no order as to costs. _______________________________ VILAS V. AFZULPURKAR, J 13.08.2009 MD [1] 1994 2 SCC 176