HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE P. SWAROOP REDDY M.A.C.M.A.No.392 of 2005 JUDGMENT: This civil miscellaneous appeal is filed by the petitioner-claimant against the order and decree dated 01.11.2004 in O.P. No.192 of 2001 on the file of the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal – cum – I Additional District Judge, Medak at Sangareddy. 2. Heard. 3. The brief facts of the case of the petitioner are as follows: On 13.12.2000 when the petitioner and his relative were coming on scooter to go to Siroor village, when they reached Raikode village, the jeep bearing No.ADY 9520 came in high speed in a rash and negligent manner and dashed the scooter, as a result, the petitioner fell down and received injuries including head injury. Immediately, he was shifted to Government Hospital, Zaheerabad and from there he was shifted to CDR Hospital, Hyderabad for better treatment. A case in Cr.No.42 of 2000 was registered by Raikode Police for the offence under Sections 337 and 338 IPC and investigated into. Hence, the claimant filed this O.P. claiming compensation of Rs.2,00,000/-, contending that he is a business man aged about 30 years. 4. Respondent No.1 remained ex parte and respondent No.2, insurance company, alone filed its counter denying the case of the claimant. 5. On the basis of the above pleadings, the following issues were framed: 1. Whether the driver of the jeep bearing No.ADY 9520 drove the vehicle in rash and negligent manner and caused the accident? 2. What is the quantum of compensation the claimant is entitled to? 3. To what relief? 6. On behalf of the claimant, the claimant got examined himself as PW.1 and the doctor, who treated the claimant got examined as P.W.2 and marked Exs.A-1 to A-10. On behalf of the insurance company, no oral evidence was adduced, however, Ex.B1 copy of policy was marked. 7. On the basis of the material available on record and after an elaborate consideration of the same, Tribunal awarded a compensation of Rs.50,645/-, to the claimant against both the respondents making them jointly and severally liable for payment of compensation. Aggrieved of the same, as stated above, the claimant preferred this appeal. 8. Now the contention of the learned counsel for the appellant is that on account of the accident, the appellant received head injury, fracture of right clavicle bone, ribs and all over the body and he spent substantial amount towards medicines and he took treatment as inpatient for more than a month and after the accident, the petitioner- appellant is unable to attend his day to day work as earlier and due to head injury, he is getting giddiness. As per the evidence of P.W.2., the doctor, who treated the petitioner, the head injury received by the petitioner may cause disturbance for long time. The evidence of P.W.2, the Medical Officer reveals that the petitioner underwent treatment for more than two years and the head injury suffered by the petitioner is grievous in nature. 9. Considering the submissions made by the learned counsel for the petitioner-appellant and on perusing the impugned judgment, I am inclined to grant another amount of Rs.10,000/- towards additional compensation. Hence, the compensation awarded by the court below is enhanced from Rs.50,645/- to Rs.60,645/-. 10. Accordingly, the Civil Miscellaneous Appeal is partly allowed enhancing the compensation from Rs.50,645/- to Rs.60,645/-. Interest on the enhanced amount of compensation is at 6% per annum. No order as to costs. ______________________ P. SWAROOP REDDY, J December 24, 2010. Rns