THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE K.S.APPA RAO C.M.A.No.2689 of 2003 JUDGMENT: This civil miscellaneous appeal is preferred aggrieved by the order and decree dated 27.02.2003 in O.P.No.373 of 2000 on the file of the Chairman, Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal-cum-District Judge, Medak at Sangareddy District. The brief facts of the case are as follows: On 14.3.2000 at about 8 A.M., while the claimant was proceeding from Venkatapuram village by walk, the driver of the lorry bearing No.AP-23-T-3919 asked the claimant and others to push the said lorry to some distance so as to start it. Accordingly, when the claimant and others were pushing the said lorry in order to start it, due to the rash and negligent driving of the lorry by its driver, after starting the engine, the front tyre of the lorry moved over the left leg of the claimant, which was crushed under the lorry tyres. Immediately, the claimant was shifted to Gandhi Hospital, Secunderabad in an unconscious condition. Learned counsel for the appellant contends that the Tribunal miserably failed to arrive at the reasons for awarding an amount of Rs.1,16,556/- and further urged that the claimant suffered amputation of left leg below the knee, which is grievous in nature and the claimant is an agricultural cooli, earning Rs.100/- per day, and he is deprived of his future earnings. Now, the point for consideration is whether the amount of compensation awarded by the Tribunal is sustainable? The factum of accident was not disputed and the liability of the respondents also was not disputed. The only point for consideration is whether the amount of compensation granted by the Tribunal is reasonable. The injured was himself examined as PW.1 and also examined Dr. K.Raja Rathnam, as PW.2 and filed Exs.A.1 to A.10. Among the aforesaid documents, Exs.A.4 to A.10 are the crucial documents supporting the claim of the claimant. In a case of this nature, the evidence of the doctor and the documentary evidence in support of the treatment placed vital role. As per the evidence of PW.2, he examined PW.1 on 18.11.2002 and found left leg of PW.1 was amputated below the knee. Accordingly, he issued Ex.A.8 disability certificate assessing the disability at 55%, which is permanent. As seen from the record, the accident was on 14.3.2000 and PW.1 all through taking treatment from the date of accident ie., 14.3.2000 till 2001. Ex.A.4 is the C.C. of injury certificate, Ex.A.5 is the out patient chits (4) in number issued by Gandhi Medical Hospital, Secunderabad, Ex.A.6 is the O.P.Chit issued by NIMS and Ex.A.7 is the Discharge summary issued by NIMS, K.R.Rathnam Orthopaedic Surgeon, Govt.Hospital, Sangareddy. All these documents clearly shows that initially the claimant/PW.1 was taken to Government Hospital, Sangareddy, from there, he was admitted as inpatient for one month in Gandhi Hospital. Thereafter, shifted to NIMS. The Tribunal without furnishing the details granted consolidated amount of Rs.1,16,556/- towards compensation without any basis. However, an amount of Rs.7,537/- was granted towards purchase of medicines against the claim of Rs.50,000/- and Rs.10,000/- towards pain and suffering. When an amount of Rs.10,000/- was granted towards pain and suffering for grievous injuries granting of Rs.7,537/- against the claim of Rs.50,000/- towards treatment is far low. Ex.A.10 is the bunch of (32) medical bills. Therefore, in any view of the matter, granting of further compensation of Rs.15,000/- against the claim of Rs.50,000/- is just and reasonable in the circumstances of the case on hand. Taking into consideration the facts and circumstances of the case, the amount of compensation granted by the Tribunal is enhanced from Rs. 1,34,093/- to Rs.1,49,093/-. The enhanced amount shall carry interest at the rate of 6% per annum from the date of petition till realisation. With this modification, the appeal is allowed. __________________ K.S.APPA RAO,J 3rd March, 2011. PNV