THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE N.R.L.NAGESWARA RAO M.AC.M.A.No.1366 OF 2011 JUDGMENT: 1. The appeal is filed by the petitioner against the order in O.P.No.733 of 2001 on the file of Motor Vehicle Tribunal-cum-District Court at Vijayanagaram, where-under the petitioner was granted a compensation of Rs.65,000/- towards the injuries received by him. This petition was tried along with another claim in O.P.No.732 of 2001. 2. According to the case of the petitioner, on 25.10.2000 when the petitioners were coming in the auto bearing No.AP 35 T 3833 to Bobbili, the lorry bearing No.AP 5 T 2115 came from Ramabhadrapuram village in a rash and negligent manner and dashed against the auto, as a result of which, the petitioners received multiple injuries. The 3rd respondent is insurer and all the respondents are liable to pay the compensation. 3. The 3rd respondent filed a counter contending that the petitioners are put to strict proof of the rashness and negligence and also the validity, the licence of the driver of the lorry. The nature of the injuries received by the petitioners and the nature of the expenditure is also disputed. O.Ps were tried together and on consideration of the evidence on record, the lower Tribunal granted compensation of Rs.65,000/- for each petitioner. The insurance company has not challenged the award. 4. The contention of the counsel for the petitioner is that the lower Court has not properly appreciated the nature of the injuries received by the petitioner and the compensation granted is too low as against the claim for Rs.4,00,000/-. As can be seen from Ex.A.9, the wound certificate, the petitioner has got two injuries, one injury is a lacerated injury on the middle of the nose and the second injury was a fracture of middle of the right clavicle. PW.4 treated the petitioner with regard to the injury to the nose and he opined that it was a fracture and he was said to be as inpatient from 03.11.2000 to 06.11.2000 and the lower Court granted compensation of Rs.7,500/- only to the said injury. Evidently, the injury to the nose causes inconvenience in breathing and pain and suffering is also more and therefore, taking into consideration the above fact and the injury being independent a sum of Rs.25,000/- is awarded as compensation towards pain and suffering for injury No.1. 5. So far as the injury to the right clavicle is concerned, it is also proved to be fracture and PW.4 has treated him. The lower Court has granted compensation of Rs.12,500/- for this and the fracture to clavicle causes the inconvenience and also restriction of the movements for some time. The pain and suffering is also more. Therefore, taking into consideration the above facts, the compensation of Rs.12,500/- granted by the lower Court is enhanced to Rs.25,000/- towards pain and suffering. 6. The lower Court has taken into consideration the disability and fixed compensation of Rs.35,000/- and it cannot be said to be less. 7. The lower Court has granted a sum of Rs.10,000/- towards loss of earnings and medical expenses and evidently, the petitioner was treated by two doctors and was in hospital for some time and therefore, the said compensation is further enhanced by Rs.5,000/-. The total compensation the petitioner is to be entitled is Rs.1,00,000/-. 8. Accordingly, the award of the lower Court is modified and the petitioner is granted a compensation of Rs.1,00,000/- and the appeal is partly allowed. The petitioner is permitted to withdraw the entire amount after the deposit. No costs. ________________________ N.R.L.NAGESWARA RAO,J Date: 08.07.2011 INL