IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF ANDHRA PRADESH : HYDERABAD THURSDAY, THE FIFTEENTH (15TH) DAY OF JUNE, TWO THOUSAND AND ELEVEN Present: HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE G.V.SEETHAPATHY MA CMA No.235 of 2009 Between: M/S Royal Sundaram Alliance Insurance Co.Ltd, Hyderabad … Appellant And: D. Eshwar Gound & another … Respondents HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE G.V.SEETHAPATHY MA CMA No.235 of 2009 JUDGMENT: This appeal is directed against the order dated 01.09.2008 in OP No.920 of 2007 on the file of the MACT cum III Additional Chief Judge, City Civil Courts, Hyderabad, wherein the said claim made by the first respondent herein was allowed awarding compensation of Rs.89,000/- with interest at 7.5% per annum from the date of petition, till the date of realization. 2. Heard the learned counsel for the appellant and the learned counsel for the first respondent. Perused the record. 3. The first respondent herein filed claim application seeking compensation of Rs.1,50,000/- for the injuries sustained by him in the motor vehicle accident that took place on 26.02.2007 at about 1.15 p.m. near Pragnapur village, Medak district. According to the claimant, on that day he was travelling in the car bearing AP 10 AT T/R 6543 and on account of the rash and negligent driving by its driver, the vehicle over turned, resulting grievous injuries to the claimant and that he under went treatment by spending considerable amount. 4. The appellant herein-insurer filed counter opposing the claim application and denying their liability to pay the compensation. 5. During trial, the claimant examined himself as PW.1 and the doctor, who treated him, was examined as PW.2 and marked Exs.A.1 to A.9. RW.1 was examined on behalf of the insurer and Ex.B.1 copy of the policy was marked. 6. 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 vehicle by its driver. The said finding is not seriously challenged. The Tribunal further held that the claimant is entitled for of Rs.75,000/- towards compensation for pain and suffering and Rs.14,000/- towards medical expenses. Accordingly the award was passed for a total compensation of Rs.89,000/- with interest at 7.5% per annum from the date of petition. 7. The only contention of the learned counsel for the appellant-insurer is that the amount of Rs.75,000/- granted towards pain and suffering is on higher side. Learned counsel for the first respondent-claimant on the other hand would contend that the Tribunal has not awarded any separate amounts for loss of earnings and other expenses and the total amount awarded by the Tribunal is just and fair compensation. 8. As seen from the medical evidence of PW.2 coupled with Exs.A.3 ML certificate and Ex.A.4 discharge summary issued by BBR Hospital, the claimant sustained three fracture injuries to three ribs. As per the II Schedule of the Motor Vehicles Act, the claimant would be entitled for a sum of Rs.5000/- to each of three fractures, which comes to Rs.15,000/-. The claimant is also entitled for Rs.14,000/- as awarded by the Tribunal towards medical expenses, as the same is born out by discharge summary and medical bills Ex.A.6. 9. It is not disputed that the claimant was in the hospital for one week. The claimant has to necessarily incur some expenses towards extra nourishment, besides engaging an attendant for his assistance. The Tribunal however did not award any amount in that regard. Having regard to the nature of the injuries and also the length of hospitalization, it is considered just and reasonable to award a sum of Rs.5000/- towards extra nourishment and Rs.5000/- towards attendant charges. The injuries sustained by the claimant have not resulted in any permanent disability. The medical evidence on record does not show that on account of the injuries, the claimant suffered any permanent disability. However, having regard to the nature of the injuries sustained by the claimant and also the fact that he was hospitalized for one week, he is entitled for some amount towards loss of income. According to the claimant, he was running cloth shop under the name style of ‘Eswar and Co.’ near Mahankali Temple, Secunderabad. It is also in his evidence that he had closed the shop for 3 months after the accident. In view of the fact that the claimant sustained three fracture injuries on his ribs, he must have necessarily lost income from the shop for a considerable period for closure of his shop. The claimant has not adduced any evidence regarding the income that he was deriving from his business. In the circumstances, it is considered that the claimant is entitled for a sum of Rs.21,000/- towards loss of income for a period of three months at the rate of Rs.7000/- per month, as he was running a cloth shop. The claimant is therefore held entitled for a total compensation of Rs.60,000/- with interest at 7.5% per annum from the date of petition, till the date of realization. The impugned award is modified accordingly. 10. In the result, the appeal is allowed to the extent stated above. __________________ G.V.SEETHAPATHY, J Date: 15.06.2011 bss