THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE GHULAM MOHAMMED M.A.C.M.A.No.2719 of 2006 JUDGMENT: Aggrieved by the order and decree, dated 17.07.2006, passed in O.P.No.815 of 2003 on the file of the III Additional Metropolitan Sessions Judge-cum-XVII Additional Chief Judge, Hyderabad (for brevity ‘the Tribunal), whereunder a sum of Rs.4,53,300/- was awarded as compensation for the injuries sustained by the appellant in a motor vehicle accident, the present appeal is filed. The appellant-claimant filed the claim petition alleging that on 29.11.2002, when he was going on his Hero Honda motor cycle bearing No.AP 37 P 9235 from Secunderabad towards Hastinapuram and when he reached Nallakunta Fever Hospital at about 9.30 pm., a lorry bearing No.ADT 341 came in a rash and negligent manner and dashed him, as a result, he fell down and sustained fracture to both his legs, head injury, spinal card injury and injury to both hands. He was operated upon and implants were also inserted to set the fractures. Contending that due to the said fractures, he is unable to bare weight and is not able to move without the assistance of attendants and also due to the permanent disability sustained by him he was removed from service, he filed the claim petition claiming compensation of Rs.10,00,000/-. Learned counsel for the appellant-injured contended that the Tribunal has erred in weighing the gravity of the injuries sustained by the claimant in the said accident; in assessing the loss of earnings of the claimant and hence, prays to enhance the compensation awarded by the Tribunal. On the other hand, learned Standing Counsel for the second respondent-claimant contended that the Tribunal took the evidence adduced by the claimant from a right perspective and awarded compensation, which is just and reasonable and hence, the same does not warrant any interference by this Court. In view of rival contentions of the learned counsel appearing on either side, the points to be determined in this appeal are - (1) Whether the compensation awarded by the Tribunal is just and reasonable? (2) If not, whether the same is liable to be enhanced? POINT Nos.1 and 2: - I have perused the entire oral and documentary evidence on record. Exs.A-1 to A-5 shows the nature of the injuries sustained by the claimant in the accident and the expenditure incurred by him towards medical treatment. Ex.A-7 is the disability certificate issued by P.W-4-the Assistant Professor of Orthopedics mentioning that the claimant sustained 45% permanent disability. In addition to that, P.W-2-doctor who treated the claimant was also examined. P.W-2 in categorical terms deposed that the claimant received crush injury on both his legs as lorry ran over his legs; that the claimant received head injury, spinal card injury and injuries on both his hands; and that the claimant underwent surgery for the ulcer of left foot (chronic) on 23.02.2005, due to which he has to walk with support only. Thus, the evidence of P.Ws.1 to 4 coupled with the documentary evidence under Exs.A-2 to A-7 clearly establishes the nature of the injuries sustained by the claimant and the medical expenditure incurred by him for his treatment. It is also proved that the claimant sustained 45% permanent disability resulting in his unfortunate removal from service. Ex.A-8 is the salary certificate of the claimant, which shows the salary of the claimant at Rs.8,827/- per month, which remained unopposed by the learned Standing Counsel for the second respondent-insurer. Thus, the annual income of the claimant comes to Rs.1,05,924/-. As the claimant sustained 45% of permanent disability, 45% of Rs.1,05,924/- comes to Rs.47,666/-. Having regard to the age of the claimant at 48 years, the appropriate multiplier to be applied is ‘11’. Computing the compensation thus, the claimant is entitled to a sum of Rs.5,24,326/- as compensation towards permanent disability. In addition to this, he is also entitled to Rs.1,25,000/- towards medical expenses, Rs.50,000/- towards pain and suffering. Thus, the claimant is entitled to a total compensation of Rs.6,99,326/-. Accordingly, the appeal is allowed in part and the impugned order of the Tribunal is modified, enhancing the compensation from Rs.4,53,300/- to Rs.6,99,326/-. The compensation enhanced by this Court shall carry interest at the rate of 6 % per annum from the date of filing of the claim petition till the date of realization However, there shall be no order as to costs. ______________________________ JUSTICE GHULAM MOHAMMED 17th March 2011 DR