IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) PRESENT THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE G.V.SEETHAPATHY C.M.A.NO.1195 of 2002. Date:26.10.2009. Between:- C.Sadasiva Reddy ..Appellant And S.M.Saifulla and another .. Respondents JUDGMENT:- This appeal is directed against the order dated 14.10.1998 in O.P.No.120 of 1994 on the file of the Chairman, Motor Accident Claims Tribunal – cum – Additional District Judge, Madanapalle wherein the claim of the appellant was allowed in part awarding compensation of Rs.80,000/- with interest at 12% p.a. from the date of filing of the petition. 2. Heard the learned counsel for the appellant and the learned counsel for respondent No.2-Insurance Company. 3. Perused the records. 4. The appellant, filed claim application seeking compensation of Rs.1,00,000/- for the injury sustained by him in the motor vehicle accident that occurred on 31.10.1993 at 8.30 a.m. According to the appellant, he is working as Inspector in R&B Department and that on 31.10.1993, at about 8.30 a.m., while he was coming to Piler on a motor cycle, a jeep bearing No.TMW 9307 came in the opposite direction in a high speed driven in rash and negligent manner and dashed the motor cycle resulting in injuries and that he was shifted to Government Hospital, Piler and from there, to S.V.R.R.Hospital, Tirupathi where he was treated as an inpatient for five days. He further pleads that subsequent to his discharge, he went to the hospital on 07.12.1993 and had found that the leg was fractured and there was heavy swelling and was again, admitted in the hospital as an inpatient and was discharged on 21.01.1994. Subsequently, he continued treatment in Rayalaseema hospital as inpatient where it was found that both the bones of the leg were fractured and operation was conducted on 24.01.1994 after getting plates and screws from Madras. The claimant further plead that the injuries have resulted in permanent disability whereby, he was unable to walk and attend his routine work. 6. The owner of the vehicle-respondent No.1 remained exparte. 7. The insurer filed a counter opposing the claim and denying their liability. 8. During enquiry, P.Ws.1 and 2 were examined and Exs.A-1 to A-21 were marked on behalf of the claimant. No oral evidence was adduced on behalf of respondent No.2-insurer but got marked Ex.B-1 – copy of the Insurance policy. 9. On a consideration of the evidence available on record, the Tribunal held that the accident occurred due to the rash and negligent driving of the jeep by its driver and further held that the claimant is entitled for a total compensation of Rs.80,000/- and by deducting Rs.12,000/- paid towards ‘no fault liability’ in O.P.No.119 of 1994, passed the Award for the balance amount of Rs.68,000/-. Not satisfied with the said Award, the present appeal is filed by the claimant seeking enhancement. 10. The Tribunal awarded a sum of Rs.49,704/- towards medical expenses to the claimant as covered by the bills – Exs.A-9 to A-14 and A-17 to A-20, Rs.5,000/- towards pain and suffering, Rs.25,080/- towards compensation for permanent disability taking the percentage of the disability at 10%. 11. According to the claimant, he was working as Works Inspector and drawing salary of Rs.4,000/- per month. But in the petition, he has stated that he was getting salary of Rs.3,127/- per month. The Tribunal, however, took the salary at Rs.2,000/- per month in the absence of any documentary evidence in proof of the income. The Tribunal, while recording a finding that the petitioner sustained 20 to 25% permanent disability as stated by P.W.1- Medical Officer, who examined the claimant and issued Ex.A-1 – medical certificate, however, took the percentage of the disability at 10%. When the Tribunal has taken the medical evidence on record to the effect that the claimant sustained permanent disability at 20 to 25%, there is absolutely, no basis for unilaterally assessing the same at 10%. In the absence of any evidence to the contra, the Tribunal ought to have taken the percentage of disability at 20% as stated by P.W.1 especially when his evidence has been found to be acceptable. Thus, taking the percentage of disability at 20% and applying the multiplier of 10.45 suitable for the age of claimant, who was aged 45 years, the loss of future income on account of the permanent disability at 20% would come to Rs.50,000/-. The other amounts awarded by the Tribunal towards medical expenses as per the medical bills and also towards pain and suffering were held to be just and reasonable. 12. In the circumstances, the claimant would be entitled for a total compensation which has to be limited to Rs.1,00,000/-. After deducting the amount of Rs.12,000/- already paid by way of no fault liability in O.P.No.119 of 1994, the claimant would be entitled for the balance amount of Rs.88,000/-. The claimant is also entitled for interest on the enhanced amount of Rs.20,000/- at 9% p.a. from today. 13. In these circumstances, the impugned Award dated 14.10.1998 is modified to the extent stated above. 14. In the result, the appeal is allowed in part. There shall be no order as to costs. _________________ G.V.SEETHAPATHY, J 26th October, 2009 AMD