THE HON’BLE MR JUSTICE L. NARASIMHA REDDY C.M.A.No.2270 of 2003 JUDGMENT: The appellant herein filed M.V.O.P.No.811 of 1999 before the Motors Accidents Claims Tribunal-cum-Principal District Judge, Warangal, claiming a sum of Rs.2,00,000/-, as compensation, against the respondents. He pleaded that on 15.05.1999, he was travelling on an Auto, bearing No. AP 28 U 152, and when the auto reached Enugurthy village, a Van, bearing No. AP 36 U 3059, driven by the 1st respondent, owned by the 2nd respondent and insured with respondents 3 and 4, dashed against the auto from behind. The appellant is said to have received grievous injuries to his right leg. He was treated at Jaya Hospital, Warangal. Twice operation to the leg was conducted and there is shortening of leg. The expenditure for treatment of the leg is Rs.80,000/-. With these and other allegations, he claimed compensation. Respondents 1 to 3 remained ex parte and the 4th respondent alone contested the matter. He denied the involvement of the van in the accident and disputed the claim made by the appellant. The Tribunal awarded a sum of Rs.60,000/-, as compensation, through its order, dated 13.03.2003. This appeal is filed seeking enhancement of the compensation. Heard learned counsel for the appellant and learned standing counsel for the 4th respondent. In support of his plea, the appellant examined PWs.1 to 3 and filed Exs.A.1 to A.17. No oral or documentary evidence was adduced by any of the respondents. Though the occurrence of the accident was in dispute, Exs.A.1 to A.3 - FIR, Charge-Sheet and Injury Certificate, establish the same. The next question is about the quantum of compensation. The appellant received a serious injury, to the tibia of his right leg. The discharge summary - Ex.A.4 and the disability certificate - Ex.A.5, disclose that the appellant was operated twice, and on account of shortening of his leg, he suffered disability to the extent of 40%. Three bunches of medical bills, marked as Exs.A.6 to A.8 were filed, claiming that sums of Rs.15,000/-, Rs.52,367/- and Rs,7,806/-, were incurred as expenditure. PW.3-the Doctor, who treated the appellant, deposed that the operation was conducted twice and that the appellant suffered disability to the extent of 40%. The Tribunal awarded a sum of Rs.15,000/- towards ‘pain and suffering’, Rs.5,000/- towards ‘loss of earnings’ and Rs.20,000/- towards ‘disability’. No interference is warranted with the amounts awarded towards ‘pain and suffering’ and grievous injury. However, the amount awarded towards ‘expenditure for treatment’ is too meagre. The bills that have been submitted under Exs.A.6 to A.8, account for about Rs.80,000/-. Even if it is said that there is exaggeration, at least, half of that amount needs to be awarded. Therefore, a further sum of Rs.20,000/- needs to be awarded for medical expenditure. The appellant stated that he was doing the business of sale of chicken and was earning Rs.2,000/- per month. Rs.5,000/- awarded on that count is adequate. Coming to the compensation for disability, it needs to be seen that PW.3 clearly stated that the disability incurred by the appellant is 40% and that would remain for the rest of his life. It would certainly have its bearing upon the earning capacity and other aspects of life. At least Rs.30,000/- must be awarded on that account. Hence, the C.M.A. is partly allowed, enhancing the compensation by Rs.50,000/- under different heads and the enhanced amount would carry interest at 7%, per annum. There shall be no order as to costs. _______________________ L.NARASIMHA REDDY, J Dt:09.11.2011 GJ