THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE G.V.SEETHAPATHY M.A.C.M.A. No.777 OF 2008 JUDGMENT: This appeal is directed against the order, dated 06.08.2007, in O.P.No.1399 of 2004 on the file of the learned Chairman, Motor Accident Claims Tribunal-cum-III Additional District Judge (FTC), Nizamabad, wherein the claim application filed by the appellant herein under Section 163-A of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 was allowed in part, awarding compensation of Rs.14,600/- with interest @ 7.5% p.a. from the date of the petition. 2. Heard both sides. Perused the record. 3. Appellant herein filed claim application seeking compensation of Rs.2,00,000/- for the injuries sustained by him in an accident that occurred on 04.07.2004. According to the claimant, on that day, he was proceeding on his scooter bearing No.AP-3179 from Gouthamnagar towards Kanteshwar at Nizamabad and that near Zilla Parishad office a motor cycle bearing No.AP-25-Q-4455, driven by the rider in a rash and negligent manner, came in the opposite direction and dashed against the scooter as a result of which the claimant sustained grievous injuries and that he was shifted to Government hospital, Nizamabad, where he underwent treatment as inpatient and later continued treatment in a private hospital. According to the claimant, he was a student and also a fruit vendor and earning Rs.10,000/- per month and on account of the injuries he suffered loss of earning capacity. Respondents filed counter opposing the claim and denying their liability to pay the compensation. 4. During enquiry, P.Ws.1 and 2 were examined and Exs.A1 to A11 were marked on behalf of the claimant. No oral evidence was adduced by the respondents, but Ex.B1-copy of the policy was marked. 5. 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 rider, but the said finding has become final as no appeal is filed by the respondents. The only question that arises for consideration is whether the claimant deserves any enhancement of compensation awarded by the Tribunal. The medical evidence on record and the testimony of P.W.2, doctor, who treated the claimant, coupled with Ex.A3-injury certificate; Ex.A4-discharge ticket and Ex.A10-X-ray films, would show that the claimant suffered fracture of both right fore arm, which is a grievous injury and multiple abrasions, which is simple injury, and he underwent treatment in the hospital for five days from 04.07.2004 to 08.07.2004. Though P.W.2 stated in his evidence that in spite of treatment, claimant had restricted movement of right hand wrist and that he cannot lift heavy weights, which is a permanent partial disability of 15%, no certificate of disability issued by the competent authority or medical Board is filed duly assessing the nature and extent of disability and its impact on the functional capacity of the hand. In the absence of any such documentary evidence, the oral statement of P.W.2 about the physical disability at 15% cannot be accepted. The question of estimating any loss of earning capacity on account of any physical disability does not therefore arise. 6. The Tribunal awarded Rs.5000/- towards pain and suffering for the grievous injury and Rs.2000/- for the simple injury, which is in accordance with the II Schedule of the Act. The Tribunal also awarded Rs.2800/- towards medical expenses, as borne out by the medical bills- Ex.A6; Rs.1800/- towards loss of income during the period of treatment; Rs.1000/- towards transportation charges and Rs.2000/- for pain and suffering during the time of treatment. The above amounts are considered to be just and reasonable and do not call for any interference. However, the Tribunal failed to award any amount towards extra nourishment or attendant charges. Having regard to the nature of the injuries sustained by the claimant and also the fact that he underwent treatment as an inpatient in the hospital, it is considered just and reasonable to award Rs.5000/- towards extra nourishment and Rs.5000/- towards attendant charges. Claimants are therefore entitled for total compensation of Rs.24,600/-, rounded off to Rs.25,000/- with interest @ 7.5% on the original amount awarded by the Tribunal from the date of petition and 6% p.a. on the enhanced amount from the date of the appeal. The impugned order is modified accordingly. 7. In the result, appeal is allowed to the extent stated above. _______________________ G.V.SEETHAPATHY, J 27th September, 2011. Tsy