IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD TUESDAY, THE TWENTY SEVENTH DAY OF DECEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND ELEVEN PRESENT THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE N.R.L. NAGESWARA RAO M.A.C.M.A.No.3496 OF 2011 Between: The New India Assurance Co. Ltd. ..... APPELLANT AND Nerella Venkata Ramana and others ....RESPONDENTS The Court made the following: THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE N.R.L. NAGESWARA RAO M.A.C.M.A.No.3496 OF 2011 JUDGMENT: This appeal is filed against the award in M.V.O.P.No.28 of 2000 on the file of IV Additional District Judge, Kakinada. A claim for compensation of Rs.1,39,700/- was made for the injuries received by respondent No.1/petitioner in a motor accident. According to respondent No.1, on 23.03.1995, when he was driving the bus bearing No. AAZ 9360, a tipper bearing No. ATT 4091 came in a rash and negligent manner and dashed against the bus as a result of which he received injuries. Respondent No.1/petitioner is the driver of the R.T.C. bus. The second respondent herein is the owner of the tipper and the appellant is the Insurance Company. After considering the rival contentions, the Tribunal below has granted compensation of Rs.52,079/-. Aggrieved by that, the present appeal is filed. The point for consideration is whether the quantum of compensation granted by the Tribunal below is just and reasonable. Point: The nature of the incident and cause of injuries to respondent No.1 herein are not seriously disputed. Respondent No.1 is said to have suffered multiple injuries and considering the same, the Tribunal has granted compensation of Rs.10,000/- towards pain and suffering. Respondent No.1 claimed a sum of Rs.20,000/- towards disability, Rs.20,000/- towards deprivation of bodily integrity and Rs.10,000/- towards loss of future enjoyment of life. But, the Tribunal by taking into consideration the disability of 5% as stated by P.W.2 and the salary as Rs.2,350/- per month awarded a sum of Rs.23,970/-. Ultimately, the tribunal has also awarded a sum of Rs.14,109/- towards loss of income for six months; Rs.3,000/- for medical expenses; Rs.1,000/- towards transport and Rs.10,000/- towards pain and suffering. Learned counsel for the appellant contends that the determination of the disability and loss of earning is not proper since the age of respondent No.1 was shown as 48, whereas the Tribunal has applied multiplier 17 by treating his age as 30 to 35 and therefore, the amount is excessive. Whatever may be the method adopted by the lower tribunal, the fact remains that respondent No.1 was a Driver of the R.T.C. and there is no proof that he lost salary or lost the job due to the accident that has taken place. Therefore, loss of earnings awarded on the basis of the disability and the method adopted by the lower Tribunal may not be proper. I feel, since respondent No.1 is said to have received fracture and other injuries, the compensation has to be determined for medical injuries. The medical expenses incurred by respondent No.1 cannot be said to be a low amount. Therefore, taking into consideration the nature of injuries, the nature of treatment respondent No.1 might have undergone and temporary disability, even without looking into the application of the multiplier the amount of Rs.52,079/- granted by the Tribunal cannot be said to be excessive. Therefore, I find no reason to interfere with the impugned award. However, the said amount shall carry interest at 7.5% per annum. With the above modification, the appeal is partly allowed. There shall be no order as to costs. ____________________________ N.R.L.NAGESWARA RAO, J December 27, 2011 MD THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE N.R.L. NAGESWARA RAO M.A.C.M.A.No.3496 OF 2011 December 27, 2011 MD