THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE K.S.APPA RAO M.A.C.M.A.No.369 of 2008 ORDER: Aggrieved by the judgment and decree, dated 06.09.2007, in M.V.O.P.No.242 of 2005 on the file of the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal-cum-II Additional District Judge, Guntur, the present appeal is filed by the petitioner seeking enhancement of compensation. Appellant herein is the petitioner in M.V.O.P.No.242 of 2005. He filed the petition claiming compensation of Rs.1,00,000/- for the injuries sustained by him in a road accident. The Tribunal, after taking consideration the evidence on record, awarded an amount of Rs.7,400/-as compensation to the appellant herein. Now the point for consideration is whether the petitioner is entitled for any enhancement of compensation as prayed in the grounds of appeal? The petitioner was aged about 27 years at the time of the alleged accident. He sustained injuries in a road traffic accident that occurred on 03.01.2005. The factum of accident is not in dispute. With regard to the injuries, the petitioner examined himself as PW.1 and examined PW.2-Dr.A. Srinivasa Rao and got marked Exs.A1 to A4 and Ex.X1. The offending vehicle admittedly had valid insurance coverage as on the date of the accident. According to P.W.1, he sustained fracture to left knee cap in the accident and he was immediately admitted in Peoples Trauma and Emergency Hospital, Guntur, and on the same day, he was discharged from the said Hospital and admitted in Sanjeevi Orthopaedic Clinic, Lakshmipuram, Guntur, and treated by Dr.Y.Laxmana Swamy and A. Srinivasa Rao of Sanjeevi Orthopaedic Clinic. After discharge from the said Sanjeevi Orthopaedic Clinic, he took treatment continuously for a couple of months and spent Rs.20,000/- towards treatment. It is also his further evidence that he is getting pain at his left knee joint and not able to attend his normal duties, thereby, he is deprived of regular income. Dr. A.Srinivasa Rao, who is examined as PW.2, deposed that he noticed fracture lower pole of patella and closed reduction on above knee on the petitioner. He further deposed that the petitioner was advised to attend for follow up treatment, and on his clinical examination, he found the petitioner had restrictive movements at the left knee moderately corresponding to 100% and was having minimum pain while climbing. PW.2 further deposed that the petitioner was having partial and permanent disability of above 15 to 20%. Ex.X1 is the case sheet of the petitioner issued by Sanjeevi Orthopedic and Physio Theraphy Centre, Guntur. In view of the evidence of P.W.2 and documentary evidence of Exs.A3 and X1, it is evident that the petitioner sustained fracture lower pole of patella and had restrictive movements at the left knee. As stated by the petitioner, he was not able to discharge his legitimate duties in his day-to-day life with the aforesaid grievous injury. The Tribunal granted only Rs.5,000/- under the head of pain and suffering and Rs.2,400/- towards medical expenses. In view of the gravity of injury of P.W.1 noted by P.W.2, the amount of Rs.5,000/- granted by the Tribunal towards pain and suffering can be said to be very meager and not corresponding to the gravity of the injury. Therefore, granting of Rs.25,000/- on that score is just and reasonable and the same is accordingly awarded. Further, it is an admitted fact that P.W.1 was treated in private Nursing Home as per Exs.A3, A4 and X1 and, therefore, granting of Rs.10,000/- towards medical expenses is just and reasonable and, accordingly, the said sum is granted. In total, the petitioner is entitled for compensation of Rs.35,000/- (Rupees Thirty Five thousand only). Though the Tribunal granted interest at the rate of 7.5% per annum, the same is reduced to 6% per annum in view of the decision in Sarla Verma v. Delhi Transport Corporation and another[1] case. With the above modification, the appeal is allowed in part. No costs. ____________________ JUSTICE K.S.APPA RAO 15.04.2011 v v [1] (2009) 6 Supreme Court Cases 121