THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE D.S.R.VARMA CIVIL MISCELLANEOUS APPEAL No.2839 of 2000 ORAL JUDGMENT: Heard both sides. 2. Aggrieved by the order and decree, dated 16.12.1996, in M.V.O.P.No.101 of 1994, passed by the Chairman, Motor Accident Claims Tribunal-cum-I Additional District Judge, Kurnool, (for brevity “the Tribunal”), awarding a sum of Rs.30,434-50 ps, as against the claim of Rs.1,00,000/- for the injuries sustained by the appellant- claimant in a motor accident that occurred on the intervening night of 11/12.9.1993 while he was going as a cleaner of the lorry, bearing registration No.AP 21T 0927, from Kothapeta to Kurnool, due to the rash and negligent driving on the part of driver of the said lorry, the present civil miscellaneous appeal has been preferred. 3. The appellant herein is the claimant, first respondent is the owner of the offending lorry and the second respondent is its insurer, in the O.P., before the Tribunal. 4. This is a case of injuries sustained by the claimant in the motor accident. The other particulars regarding the accident and the aspect of negligence are not referred to since not in dispute. 5. The Tribunal, after appreciating the evidence on record, both oral and documentary, awarded a sum of Rs.30,434-50 ps, towards compensation. Hence the present appeal. 6. The only point that arises for consideration in this appeal is whether the quantum of compensation awarded by the Tribunal is proper and justified. 7. Admittedly, because of the accident, the claimant sustained fracture to his right leg, injuries on his head and right shoulder. Due to the said injuries, he was forced to undergo operation twice and took treatment in the hospital for considerable period by incurring huge expenditure. The Tribunal found that the claimant was a young boy of about 22 years old and earning a sum of Rs.800/- per month towards salary and Rs.10/- per day towards batha. The Tribunal also found that the claimant was possessing a valid licence to drive light motor vehicles. 8. So far as the medical evidence is concerned, the partial and permanent disability suffered by the claimant was estimated at 20% and it was also found that the claimant cannot sit and squat properly. In this connection, it is to be seen that though the disability of the claimant is estimated at 20%, sometimes the actual disability has to be assessed basing on the occupation of the injured. 9. In the instant case, it is not in dispute that the claimant was holding a valid licence to drive light motor vehicles and also earning a good sum by working as cleaner as on the date of accident. Further, taking into consideration of his age, he has good prospects in his future. 10. Therefore, having regard to the facts and circumstances, particularly keeping in view the physical and mental trauma suffered by the claimant, I deem it appropriate to enhance the amount of compensation from Rs.30,434-50 ps to Rs.40,434/-. 11. In the result, the civil miscellaneous appeal is allowed in part, enhancing the total amount of compensation from Rs.30,434/- to Rs.40,434/- (Rupees forty thousand four hundred and thirty four only). The additional amount of Rs.10,000/- (Rupees ten thousand only) shall carry interest at 7.5 per cent per annum from the date of filing of the O.P. before the Tribunal, till realization. There shall be no order as to costs. _______________________ JUSTICE D.S.R.VARMA 01.07.2010 Msr. THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE D.S.R.VARMA CIVIL MISCELLANEOUS APPEAL No.2839 of 2000 01.07.2010 (Msr)