HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE GHULAM MOHAMMED M.A.C.M.A.NO. 494 OF 2006 JUDGMENT: This Appeal under Section 173 of the Motor Vehicles Act 1988, is directed against the Judgment and Decree dated 08.08.2005 passed by the IV Additional Chief Judge-cum-Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, CCC at Hyderabad (for short ‘the Tribunal’) in OP No. 1411 of 2003 filed by the claimant claiming compensation of Rs. 1,50,000/- for the injuries sustained in a motor accident that occurred on 14.3.2003 at about 5.00 PM while he along with other relatives returning from dinner at 5.00 PM in a DCM Van bearing No. AP 12/U-4472, when they reached Jhangirabad, Bandlaguda Village, a Tipper bearing No. AP-9/V-296 came in opposite direction in a rash and negligent manner dashed against their DCM Van and as a result of which, the claimant sustained injuries. The first respondent owner of the Tipper bearing No. AP 9/V-296 and the second respondent insurer of the Tipper field their counter denying the averments made in the petition. 2. The Tribunal held that the accident occurred only due to rash and negligent driving of the Tipper bearing No. AP 9/V-296 by its driver belonging to the first respondent, insured with the second respondent and both the respondents are jointly and severally liable to pay the compensation. The Tribunal also taking into consideration of the evidence available on record, granted total compensation of Rs. 72,680/-with interest at 9% per annum from the date of petition till the date of realization. Aggrieved by the same, the present Civil Miscellaneous Appeal is filed by the claimant. 3. The learned counsel appearing for the claimant contended that the Court below wrongly granted less compensation without appreciating the oral and documentary evidence on record. He also submits that the learned Judge failed to award the amount as claimed inspite of the evidence on record therefore amount awarded deserves to be enhanced. 4. On the other hand, the learned counsel appearing for the respondents submits that the order of the Court below is quite reasonable and there is no need to interfere with the order with regard to quantum of compensation but as far as the rate of interest is concerned, the same may be reduced. 5. Heard the learned counsel appearing for both sides and also perused the entire material made available on record. 6. As seen from the record, the accident occurred on 14.03.2003 at about 5.00 PM while the claimant along with other relatives returning from dinner at 5.00 PM in a DCM Van bearing No. AP 12/U-4472, and when they reached Jhangirabad, Bandlaguda Village, a Tipper bearing No. AP-9/V-296 came in an opposite direction in a rash and negligent manner dashed against their DCM Van and as a result of which, the claimant sustained injuries. The Tribunal taking into consideration the evidence that the claimant treated as in-patient till 18.3.2003 and she sustained fracture of femur left side, fracture of both bones right leg, fracture of superior and inferior pubic rami left side granted total compensation of Rs. 50,000/-. Therefore, I see no reasons to interfere with the order passed by the Tribunal and the Civil Miscellaneous Appeal is liable to be dismissed. 7. Accordingly, the Civil Miscellaneous appeal is dismissed. There shall be no order as to costs. __________________________ GHULAM MOHAMMED, J Date: 10.2.2010 KA