HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE V.ESWARAIAH C.M.A.NO.2278 OF 2002 DT.24.6.2010 Between: Anil ..Appellant And Ahmed Khan and others ..Respondents HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE V.ESWARAIAH C.M.A.NO.2278 OF 2002 JUDGMENT: Appellant herein is the claimant. He filed O.P.No.225 of 1994 on the file of the Chairman, Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal-cum-District Judge, Adilabad, under Section 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988, claiming compensation of Rs.1,00,000/- for the injuries sustained in the motor accident that occurred on 30.11.1993. It is the case of the appellant that while he was going towards Rampur side on his cycle from Sri Sai Baba Ginning Factory on 30.11.1993 at about 4.30 p.m., a lorry bearing No.AP 07T 1249 driven by its driver came with high speed in rash and negligent manner dashed the petitioner as a result of which he sustained bleeding injury to his left leg and his upper thigh bone was fractured and he was admitted in the Government Hospital where he underwent treatment as inpatient till 6.12.1993. The petitioner was advised to take rest and treatment for further six months and due to the accident the petitioner could not move freely and unable to do his normal day-to- day work. He was working in the Ginning Factory and earning Rs.50/- per day and because of the accident he is unable to work. He spent Rs.10,000/- towards medical and treatment charges and attendant charges. There is no dispute that the 1st respondent is the driver of the lorry, 2nd respondent is the owner and the 3rd respondent is the insurer of the said lorry. Ex.A-1 is the F.I.R., Ex.A-2 is the Case Diary Part-I, Ex.A-3 is the injury certificate and Ex.A- 4 is the insurance policy. In the cross-examination, it is stated that he has not filed any document to show that he is working on daily wages in Ginning Factory and earning Rs.1800/- per month and he has also not filed any document in support of the expenditure said to have been spent by him. A suggestion was made that he has not suffered any serious injuries. In so far as the accident is concerned, it is not in dispute. This appeal is filed claiming enhancement of compensation. The court below awarded compensation of Rs.20,000/- along with interest at 12% per annum. It is contended that the compensation awarded by the court below is very meager and low and the appellant was working as labour and earning Rs.50.- per day in the Ginning Factory and he became disabled due to the fracture of the upper thigh (Pelvis) and unable to do any work and lost his earning capacity. Admittedly, no medical evidence has been filed by the appellant except Ex.A-3. Ex.A-3 is a requisition by the Medical Officer, who examined the injured for taking appropriate action, which shows tht he received two simple injuries one abrasion and one contusion on the left foot and pelvis fracture. No further medical evidence has been adduced whether there was any fracture of the leg and about the treatment also no medical bills were produced and no doctor was examined. Having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case, I am of the opinion that the appellant is not entitled to any enhancement of compensation. The appeal is accordingly dismissed. There shall be no order as to costs. _________________ V.ESWARAIAH, J. 24.6.2010 kpr