HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE GHULAM MOHAMMED MACMA NO. 2765 OF 2005 JUDGMENT: This appeal is filed under Section 173 of Motor Vehicles Act, 1989 against award dated 10-04-2003 passed in O.P.No.554 of 1998 on the file of the Principal Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Nellore (District Judge, Nellore). 2. The appellant herein is the petitioner and the respondent herein is the respondent herein in the said O.P. For the sake of convenience, I refer to the parties as arrayed in the O.P. 3. The factual background for the appeal is that on 01-01-1997, the appellant was travelling in an A.P.S.R.T.C. bus bearing registration No.AP 9 Z 1425 from Penchalakona to Nellore and at about 4.30 p.m when the bus reached near Revulla Yeruguntapalem of Podalakur Mandal, the driver of the bus drove the same in highly rash and negligent manner, lost control over the bus and dashed against a road side tree, as a result, the appellant and other sustained injuries. Podalakur police have registered crime No.1 of 97. 4. To support his claim, the appellant got himself examined as PW.1 and PW.-2 was examined and got marked Exs-A-1 to A-8 which happened to be the certified copies of F.I.R., Charge Sheet, wound certificate, medical bills, X-ray films, discharge note and prescription issued by the doctor. On behalf of the respondents, RW-1 was examined and got marked no documents. RW-1 filed its counter denying the occurrence of the narration of the incident and there was no negligence on behalf of the bus driver and contended that the compensation claimed by the petitioner is excessive. 5. On the above pleadings, the Tribunal framed issues about the responsibility for the accident and the entitlement of the petitioner and awarded a sum of Rs.70,000/- against a claim of Rs.1,60,000/-. Aggrieved by the same, the appellant preferred this appeal. 6. As seen from the record, it is no doubt true that due to rash and negligent driving of the bus bearing No. AP 9Z 1425 by its driver, the accident occurred and due to which, the petitioner sustained injuries on 01-01-1997. As far as the claim of compensation is concerned, according to PW-1,the petitioner was hale and healthy prior to accident and was working as a teacher and earning net income of Rs.3,000/- per month. The Tribunal granted Rs.8,000/- towards medical expenses and Rs.5,000/- towards extra nourishment which in my view this need not be interfered with and the same are confirmed. So far as compensation of Rs.30,000/- towards pain and suffering is concerned, the Tribunal ought to have taken into consideration the gravity of the injuries. As seen from the medical evidence and the oral and documentary evidence of PW2, the injuries sustained by the appellant are in grievous in nature and therefore granting an amount of Rs.39,000/- towards pain and suffering is just and reasonable. So far as the compensation towards the past and future earnings are concerned, the income of the applicant is taken at Rs.3,000/- per month. As per decision of the Supreme Court reported i n SARLA VERMA v. DELHI TRANSPORT CORPORATION[1] the appropriate multiplier for the age of 35 is 16. Hence, the loss of future earnings would come to Rs.3,000/- x 16 = Rs.48,000/-. Thus the total amount of compensation comes to Rs.1,00,000/- (Rs.8,000 + Rs.5,000 + Rs.39,000 + Rs.48,000/-). 7. Accordingly, this appeal filed by the appellant is partly allowed. The rate of interest is granted at 7% per annum on the enhanced compensation. There shall be no order as to costs. ____________________ GHULAM MOHAMMED, J March 03, 2011 SP/KK HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE GHULAM MOHAMMED MACMA NO.2765 OF 2005 March 03, 2011 SP/ KK [1] (2009) 6 SCC 121