THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE N.R.L.NAGESWARA RAO M.A.C.M.A.No. 2189 of 2011 JUDGMENT: The appeal is filed against the order dated 10.12.2004 in O.P.No.310 of 2001 on the file of the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal- cum-Additional District Judge, Vizianagaram questioning the quantum of compensation. The petitioner is said to have received injuries in the motor accident on 08.09.2000 when he was going on a cycle, the bus bearing No.AP 30 T 5225 came behind and dashed against him, as a result of which he received multiple injuries and was treated in the hospital. The 2nd respondent is said to be the owner of the vehicle. The 1st respondent is the driver and the 3rd respondent is the insurance company. The 1st respondent, the respondents 4 and 5, who are legal representatives of the 2nd respondent, remained ex parte in the lower Tribunal. The 3rd respondent filed a counter denying the nature of accident, nature of injuries and its liability. After considering the evidence on record, the lower Tribunal found that the incident was due to the fault of the driver of the bus. But, however, granted a compensation of Rs.25,000/- taking it as a permanent disability by applying the provisions of Section 140 of the Motor Vehicles Act (for short “the Act”). In fact, this claim was made under Section 166 of the Act and not under Section 140 of the Act. The learned counsel for the appellant contends that the petitioner has suffered one grievous injury and one simply injury and Ex.A-2 wound certificate was filed and Ex.X-1 case sheet also was filed and it shows that the petitioner was in hospital from 08.09.2000 to 15.09.2000. In fact, the doctor was also examined to prove the nature of the injuries. The petitioner claims that because of the injuries he suffered loss of earnings. Evidently, so far as the claim for loss of earnings is concerned, the petitioner is a minor and, therefore, his earning capacity cannot be taken into consideration. But, however, the lower Tribunal is not granted the compensation as required by applying the provisions of Section 166 of the Act. The evidence of P.W.2 shows that the petitioner has got a disability of 10% partial permanent. Therefore, taking into consideration the above fact, a sum of Rs.20,000/- is granted as compensation for pain and suffering, a sum of Rs.10,000/- is granted as compensation for medical expenses and attendance and a sum of Rs.20,000/- is granted towards disability and the total compensation entitled is Rs.50,000/- (Rupees fifty thousand only) and accordingly, the order of the lower Tribunal is modified. The petitioner will be entitled to the interest at 6% per annum on the enhanced compensation. Accordingly, the appeal is allowed. No costs. ________________________ N.R.L.NAGESWARA RAO, J 15-09-2011 MR THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE N.R.L.NAGESWARA RAO M.A.C.M.A. No. 2189 of 2011 DATE: 15-09-2011 MR