THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE N.R.L.NAGESWARA RAO M.A.C.M.A. No. 1722 of 2011 JUDGMENT: The appeal is filed by the petitioner against the order dated 04.10.2004 in O.P.No.1589 of 2001 on the file of the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal-cum-IX Additional Chief Judge (FTC), City Civil Court, Hyderabad questioning the quantum of compensation. The appellant is the claimant and according to him on 18.12.2000 when he was traveling in the auto bearing No.AP 13 V 779, due to rash and negligent driving of its driver, the auto turned turtle. He received multiple injuries and was treated in hospital. He claims to be a driver of lorry, earning Rs.4,000/- per month and he claimed compensation of Rs.1,50,000/-. The 1st respondent is the owner and the 2nd respondent is the insurance company. The insurance company filed a counter putting strict proof of the contents of the petition and contending that the accident was due to overloading of the auto and there is violation of the conditions of the policy and, therefore, the insurance company is not liable to pay the compensation. On behalf of the petitioner, P.Ws.1 to 3 were examined and marked Exs.A-1 to A-9. On behalf of the respondents, R.W.1 was examined and marked Exs.B-1 and B-2. After considering the evidence on record, the lower Tribunal granted a compensation of Rs.37,800/- with interest at 9% per annum. The learned counsel for the appellant contends that the lower Tribunal has not taken into consideration the disability and also the loss of earnings properly and the amount of compensation granted by the lower Tribunal is not just. As can be seen from the record, to prove the nature of injuries received by the petitioner, he filed discharge summary Ex.A-2, which shows that he was admitted with fracture of both bones of left hand and was in hospital from 18.12.2000 to 24.12.2000. The doctor gave the opinion that there is 40% of disability due to malunion. He examined P.W.2 to prove the facts. The lower Tribunal taking into consideration the nature of the injury, granted a sum of Rs.25,000/- towards pain and suffering for the compound fracture. The lower Tribunal considering the bills produced by the appellant granted a sum of Rs.9,142.50 paise, but the mere medical expenses does not mean the amount of medical bills and there will be need for extra nourishment and also attendant charges. Therefore, taking into consideration the above fact, this claim is enhanced to Rs.15,000/-. Evidently, there is no proof of earnings of the petitioner as a lorry driver. He was in hospital and the fracture, evidently, takes time for heeling and there is a disability of 40%, which was opined by the doctor. Therefore, taking into consideration the above fact, I feel that the amount towards loss of earnings granted by the lower Tribunal at Rs.3,750/- is on a lower side and a sum of Rs.15,000/- is granted for the same. Further, taking into consideration of the above facts, a sum of Rs.5,000/- is granted towards disability. Therefore, the total compensation for which the petitioner will be entitled is Rs.60,000/- (Rupees sixty thousand only). The liability and interest as made by the lower Tribunal are confirmed. With the above modification, the appeal is allowed. No costs. ________________________ N.R.L.NAGESWARA RAO, J 24-08-2011 MR THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE N.R.L.NAGESWARA RAO M.A.C.M.A. No. 1722 of 2011 DATE: 24-08-2011 MR