THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE P. SWAROOP REDDY C.M.A.No.2025 OF 2002 JUDGMENT: This civil miscellaneous appeal is filed by the Executive Engineer, Irrigation Department, H.N.S.S.Division, Anantapur, against the order dated 23.01.2001 passed by the learned Chairman, Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal – cum - Additional District Judge, Anantapur, in O.P.No.84 of 1997, who granted compensation of Rs.51,848/- to the present respondent, who is the claimant in O.P. 2. Heard. 3. The facts are as follows: According to the respondent-claimant, he was running a petty shop near Zilla Parishat office, Anantapur. On 24.10.1996 at about 8.45 a.m. while the claimant, petitioner in O.P. was going on a bicycle near Gate No.1 of Zilla Parishad Office, zeep bearing No.AP 02 2851 came from headquarters hospital side in high speed in a rash and negligent manner, dashed the petitioner’s bicycle, he fell down and suffered fracture on his right leg. He was shifted to Government Hospital, Anantapur, where he was inpatient for about two months. Two surgeries were performed. Even after discharge from the hospital, he took treatment in a private hospital incurring Rs.2000/-. He spent Rs.10,000/- for medicines. A case in Cr.No.51 of 1996 was registered about the accident. He claimed compensation of Rs.80,000/-. In the counter filed by the first respondent driver it is stated that there was no negligence on the part of the driver. The third respondent – District Collector filed a counter, which was adopted by the second respondent, generally denying the accident and contending that the compensation claimed is appropriate. On the basis of the above pleadings, the following issues were framed: 1. Whether the accident occurred on 24.10.96 due to rash and negligent driving of the zeep bearing No.AP-02- 2851 by its driver, hit the bicycle of the petitioner and caused injuries to the petitioner? 2. Whether the petitioner is entitled for compensation, if so, to what amount and from which respondent? 3. To what amount? On behalf of the petitioner, P.W.1 was examined and Exs.A- 1 to A-5 were marked. Out of which, Ex.A1 is copy of FIR, Ex.A2 is copy of wound certificate, Ex.A3 is copy of charge sheet, Ex.A4 is disability certificate and Ex.A5 are medical bills. On behalf of the respondents, no oral or documentary evidence was adduced. Considering the material on record, the Court below granted compensation of Rs.51,848/-, holding that respondents 1 to 3 are liable. Aggrieved by the above quantum of compensation, the present appeal is filed by respondents 2 and 3. Now, the point for consideration is: Whether there are any grounds for allowing the appeal? There is no serious dispute about the accident even according to the counter filed on behalf of the respondents. The only question is, whether the compensation granted is unreasonable? The medical certificate Ex.A2 reveals that the petitioner suffered lacerated injury on the lower third of right leg and there was deformity, there was fracture exposing the bone. X.ray revealed fracture of right tibia and fibula. The Court below observed that the petitioner shall be entitled for Rs.30,000/- for two injuries and Rs.21,848/- towards medical bills. Though the compensation looks slightly on higher side, it cannot be said to be unreasonable and it is not a case to interfere with the judgment of the court below and the appeal is liable to be dismissed. Accordingly, the C.M.A. is dismissed. No costs. ______________________ P. SWAROOP REDDY, J. 23rd September 2010, Rns