THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE K.S.APPA RAO M.A.C.M.A.No.370 of 2008 ORDER: Being aggrieved by the order and decree, dated 19.11.2007, in M.V.O.P.No.255 of 2006 on the file of the Motor Vehicles Accidents Claims Tribunal-cum-IV Additional District Judge, Guntur, the present appeal has been filed by the petitioner seeking enhancement of compensation. Appellant herein is the petitioner in M.V.O.P.No.255 of 2006. He filed the petition claiming compensation of Rs.2,00,000/- for the injuries sustained by him in the motor vehicle accident. The Tribunal, after considering both the oral and documentary evidence, granted an amount of Rs.25,000/- towards compensation fixing the liability against respondents 1 and 2 jointly and severally. Now the point for consideration is whether the petitioner is entitled for any enhancement of compensation? In order to prove the accident, the petitioner examined himself as PW.1 and examined PW.2-Dr.S.S.V.Ramana and got marked Exs.A1 to A5. The factum of accident is not in dispute. It is the evidence of P.W.1 that on 23.01.2006 at 4.30 p.m., while he along with some others were traveling in an auto, he met with an accident due to rash and negligent driving of the driver of a lorry bearing No. AP 37 U 2131, due to which he sustained multiple injuries and immediately he was admitted in Government General Hospital, Guntur, for treatment and later shifted to private Hospital for better treatment. P.W.2-Dr.S.S.V.Ramana, working in Yesaswi Hospital, Guntur, deposed that on 31.01.2006, he has seen the patient-PW.1 with compound fracture of right humerus with brachial plexus on right side and fracture on both bones of right fore arm just above the wrist. He further deposed that on 07.02.2006, interlocking nail of right humerus was done and plaster of paris was applied for right fore arm and for both the bone fractures. He also deposed that there is an extensive scarring of front of the right shoulder and right upper arm with discharging sinus over the right upper arm. P.W.2 further deposed that the patient is not able to abduct the right shoulder and grip of right hand is weak and the percentage of disability is 30%, which is permanent, and issued Ex.A4-discharge summary sheet. As seen from the impugned order, the injured is aged 28 years. Due to fracture of right upper arm and fore arm with deformity of right shoulder and right wrist, there will be recurring hindrance in day-to-day life of the injured. Though the disability is estimated as 30%, the same is not proved by any authenticated document. However, taking into consideration the gravity of the injuries noted by P.W.2 and the treatment given to P.W.1 and the surgery underwent by P.W.1, granting of Rs.40,000/- to the aforesaid injuries coupled with the disability is just and reasonable and the same is accordingly awarded. The petitioner though not filed the medical bills, filed Ex.A4- discharge summary and Ex.A5- X-ray. Therefore, in view of the injuries noted by P.W.2, granting of Rs.15,000/- towards treatment is just and reasonable besides granting of Rs.5,000/- towards extra-nourishment and Rs.5,000/- towards loss of earnings. Thus, in all, the petitioner is entitled for compensation of Rs.65,000/- (Rs.40,000/- + 15,000/- + 5,000/- + 5,000/-) payable by respondents 1 and 2 with interest. Though the Tribunal granted interest at 7.5% per annum, the same is hereby reduced to 6% from the date of petition till realization. With the above modification, the appeal is allowed in part. No costs. ____________________ JUSTICE K.S.APPA RAO 15.04.2011 v v