THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE D.S.R.VARMA CIVIL MISCELLANEOUS APPEAL No.898 of 2003 ORAL JUDGMENT: Heard both sides. 2. Aggrieved by the order and decree, dated 26.7.2002, in O.P.No.369 of 1998, passed by the Chairman, Motor Accident Claims Tribunal (Additional District Judge), Nizamabad (for brevity “the Tribunal”), in awarding compensation of Rs.5,50,000/- as against the claim of 12,00,000/- for the injuries sustained by the respondent- claimant in a motor accident that occurred on 08.07.1996 at about 2-00 p.m., in the limits of Tatipally village, on the road leading from Korutla to Karimnagar, due to the rash and negligent driving on the part of the driver of the bus, bearing registration No.AP 9Z 7869, belonging to the appellants-A.P. State Road Transport Corporation, the present civil miscellaneous appeal has been preferred. 3. This is a case of injuries sustained by the claimant in a road accident. The particulars regarding the method and manner in which the accident took place are not referred to since already on record. The Tribunal, after appreciating the evidence on record, both oral and documentary, awarded a compensation of Rs.5,50,000/- towards the compensation. Challenging the said quantum of compensation, the Corporation had filed the present appeal. 4. The only point that arises for consideration in this appeal is whether the quantum of compensation awarded by the Tribunal is proper and justified. 5. I have carefully gone through the impugned order passed by the Tribunal with elaborate reasoning as regards the nature of injuries sustained by the claimant. 6. As per the evidence of P.W.1-claimant, he sustained fracture to his nose, multiple fractures to his right hand and right leg, multiple and grievous injuries to head and face, apart from other injuries on other parts of the body. Even as per Ex.A-3 wound certificate, the claimant sustained three fractures, and as per Ex.A-122 disability certificate, the claimant suffered 80% permanent partial disability. Having regard to the nature of the injuries sustained by the claimant, which are supported by medical bills under Exs.A-5 to A-88, and also taking into consideration the earning capacity of the claimant at Rs.15,000/- to Rs.20,000/- per month as an agriculturist and as civil contractor, the Tribunal had rightly awarded the compensation of Rs.5,50,000/-. Therefore, I do not find any reason to interfere with the quantum of compensation awarded by the Tribunal. 7. However, it is to be seen that the Tribunal had awarded interest at 9% per annum from the date of filing of the O.P. before the Tribunal, till realization. In my considered view, the said rate of interest is on higher side. Therefore, I feel it expedient to reduce the rate of interest from 9% to 7.5% from the date of filing of the O.P., before the Tribunal, till realization. 8. Subject to the above modification, the civil miscellaneous appeal is allowed in part. There shall be no order as to costs. _______________________ JUSTICE D.S.R.VARMA 08.07.2010 Msr. THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE D.S.R.VARMA CIVIL MISCELLANEOUS APPEAL No.898 of 2003 08.07.2010 (Msr)