THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE N.R.L.NAGESWARA RAO M.A.C.M.A.No. 2202 of 2011 JUDGMENT: The appeal is filed against the order dated 19.08.2003 in O.P.No.435 of 2002 on the file of the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal- cum-III Additional District Judge, Karimnagar questioning the quantum of compensation. The claimant is said to have received injuries on 17.10.2001 while traveling in a jeep bearing No.MH-13-F-116, a Tata Sumo bearing No.MH-36-C-8661 belonging to the 1st respondent came in a rash and negligent manner and dashed against the jeep. As a result of which the petitioner received multiple injuries. He took treatment and spent money for the same and suffered disability and loss of earnings. The 1st respondent is the driver, 2nd respondent is the owner and the 3rd respondent is the insurance company, they are jointly and severally liable to pay compensation. The 1st and 2nd respondents remained ex parte and the 3rd respondent filed counter denying the petition averments, nature of accident, nature of injuries and its liability. After considering the evidence on record, the lower Tribunal found that the incident was due to the fault of the driver of the Tata Sumo and granted compensation of Rs.75,000/-. The learned counsel for the appellant contends that the assessment of the compensation by the lower Tribunal is not proper. As can be seen from the material and evidence on record, the petitioner is said to have received a commuted fracture and open fracture of right elbow joint and right forearm and he was admitted in hospital on 18.10.2001 as per the evidence of P.W.2. He was said to have been operated on 28.10.2001 and the P.W.2 opined that the disability is at 50%. P.W.2 also further stated that P.W.1 was under his treatment for a period of three months as out-patient. Taking into consideration the evidence of P.W.2 and also the nature of the injuries, the lower Tribunal has granted a compensation of Rs.25,000/- towards pain and suffering and Rs.30,000/- towards medical expenses and Rs.20,000/- towards disability. The learned counsel for the appellant contends that in fact more than Rs.70,000/- was spent as expenditure for treatment. But, evidently, all the documents are not filed supporting the said claim. So also, considering the disability and also the certificate issued by the medical board under Ex.A-7, the lower Tribunal has granted compensation of Rs.20,000/-. But, as can be seen from the evidence on record, the petitioner has suffered multiple injuries and was under treatment in hospital for long time and so also operated. The lower Tribunal has not granted any amount towards loss of earnings for the period of treatment. So also the quantum of compensation with regard to the medical expenses and towards disability also appear to be on a lower side. Since the learned counsel for the appellant contends that there is loss of earnings and the permanent disability, the matter is remanded to the lower Tribunal for determination of the loss of earnings and the nature of the disability and quantum of compensation. Both the parties shall be given an opportunity to determine the fair compensation. No costs. ________________________ N.R.L.NAGESWARA RAO, J 22-09-2011 MR THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE N.R.L.NAGESWARA RAO M.A.C.M.A. No. 2202 of 2011 DATE: 22-09-2011 MR