HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE N.R.L. NAGESWARA RAO M.A.C.M.A.No.2366 of 2011 JUDGMENT: The appeal is filed by the appellant/petitioner against the order in O.P.No.91 of 2001 on the file of the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal-cum- V Additional District Judge (Fast Track Court) at Nizamabad, questioning the quantum of compensation. A claim was made for compensation of Rs.1,80,000/- for the injuries said to have been received by the petitioner. 2. According to the case of the petitioner, on 12.12.1999 when he was going on a scooter bearing No.AP 25 D 8511, the lorry tipper bearing No.AP 16 W 9713 came in a rash and negligent manner and dashed against the petitioner, as a result of which, he suffered multiple injuries and the disability and spent money for treatment and also the scooter was damaged. The 1st respondent is owner. The 2nd respondent is Insurance Company. The Insurance Company has filed a counter disputing the nature of the liability and putting the petitioner to strict proof of rashness and negligence on the part of the driver of the vehicle, nature of injuries and also the expenditure incurred by him. After considering the evidence on record, the lower Tribunal has granted a compensation of Rs.10,000/- . Aggrieved by the same, the present appeal is filed. 3. The point for consideration is whether the quantum of compensation granted by the lower Tribunal is just and reasonable? 4. POINT: The learned counsel for the appellant strongly contends that there is no dispute about the accident or the liability of the respondents. According to him, even if the evidence of the doctor, who was examined as PW.2, is to be ignored with regard to the disability, the lower Tribunal has accepted that the petitioner has sustained a crush injury to the right foot in the accident and he was treated in the Government hospital. The lower Tribunal has taken into consideration the treatment of the petitioner is free of cost. It is common knowledge that mere plea of free treatment in the hospital is not the only expenditure to be taken into consideration since there will be attendance and also extra nourishment that has be given to the patient. He was said to be in hospital for sufficient time. The injury, which was received by the petitioner is a crush injury to the right foot and by the nature of it, it is a grievous one and causes partial temporary disability and also loss of earnings. The lower Tribunal has not taken into consideration all these factors and has only granted a lumpsum compensation of Rs.10,000/-, which is not proper. Therefore, taking into consideration the nature of the injuries, a sum of Rs.15,000/- is granted as compensation for pain and suffering, a sum of Rs.10,000/- granted for medical attendance and expenditure and a sum of Rs.25,000/- is granted towards loss of earnings and disability. The petitioner is entitled to a total compensation of Rs.50,000/-. Accordingly, the point is answered. In the result, the appeal is allowed. There shall be no order as to costs. _______________________________ JUSTICE N.R.L. NAGESWARA RAO Date:14.10.2011 INL