THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE N.R.L.NAGESWARA RAO M.A.C.M.A. No.1873 of 2011 JUDGMENT:- The appeal is filed by the claimant questioning the quantum of compensation. The claim was made for a sum of Rs.1,50,000/- for the injuries received by the petitioner/appellant in a motor accident on 15-11-1996. The petitioner was said to be travelling as a pillion rider on a motor cycle bearing No.AP-23-A- 4752 from Dichpally towards Nizamabad and due to rash and negligent driving of the driver of the motor cycle, the incident was happened and the petitioner fell down and received multiple injuries and was treated in the hospital. The Insurance Company contended that the petitioner is put to strict proof of rashness and negligence attributed to the driver and the nature of the injuries and the liability is also disputed. After considering the evidence on record, the lower Tribunal found that the incident was due to the fault of the driver of the motor cycle on which the petitioner was travelling. The Insurance Company has not challenged the award. As can be seen from the record, the petitioner apart from himself, examined another person as PW.2 who stated that the petitioner was admitted in District Head Quarters Hospital and operated on 22-11-1996 and was discharged on 27-11-1996 and case sheet Ex.A-7 was marked. Ex.A-3 shows that the petitioner has got two simple injuries and one grievous injury. The petitioner was said to have discharged at his request. The lower Tribunal has granted a compensation of Rs.40,000/- as lumpsum without giving any particulars. Evidently, the evidence of PW.2 was not rejected. Ex.A-3 shows that the petitioner has got one grievous injury and two simple injuries and he was admitted in the hospital for a period of one week. Therefore, for the nature of the injuries and the nature of the operation conducted, a sum of Rs.25,000/- is to be granted towards pain and suffering. Since he was operated and there are medical bills worth Rs.45,000/-, I feel ends of justice would meet if a sum of Rs.10,000/- is granted as compensation for medical expenses and attendance. The evidence of PW.2 shows that there was a disability and it does not show that it is a permanent disability. The petitioner was evidently employed in Government Service and if he is on leave, he will not loose any earnings. There is no proof of any loss of earnings or promotion. Therefore, taking into consideration the above nature, a sum of Rs.15,000/- can be granted as compensation for partial disability and total compensation to which the petitioner/appellant is entitled to Rs.50,000/-. There is nothing to prove that the policy did not cover the pillion rider and therefore in view of the above circumstances, the Insurance Company is liable to pay the same. Accordingly, the appeal is partly allowed. The appellant/petitioner is entitled for a sum of Rs.50,000/- towards total compensation. _______________________ N.R.L. NĀGESWARA RĀO,J 16-09-2011 TSNR