HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE N.R.L. NAGESWARA RAO M.A.C.M.A.No.2206 OF 2011 JUDGMENT: The appeal is filed by the appellant/petitioner against the order in O.P.No.290 of 2000 on the file of the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal- cum- I Additional District Judge, Nalgonda, questioning the quantum of compensation. 2. According to the claimant, on 03.09.1998 at about 9.00 P.M., when he was travelling in the auto bearing No.AP 13 U 8791 from Raigiri to Bhongir, the lorry bearing No.AP 11 T 8182 came in a rash and negligent manner driven by its driver and dashed against the auto, as a result of which, the petitioner received injuries. The petitioner claims to have received multiple grievous injuries and suffered disability and spent money for treatment. The petitioner claimed a compensation of Rs.2,00,000/-. The 1st respondent was owner and the 2nd respondent is Insurance Company. Therefore, the respondents are liable to pay the compensation. The 1st respondent remained ex parte and the 2nd respondent filed a counter denying the averments in the petition, putting the petitioner to strict proof of rashness and negligence on the part of the driver of the vehicle, nature of injuries received by the petitioner and also the expenditure incurred by him. After considering the evidence on record, the lower Tribunal has granted a compensation of Rs.53,000/-. 3. The learned counsel for the appellant contends that the quantum of compensation granted by the lower Tribunal is not just and it has not taken into consideration the nature of injuries suffered by the petitioner. As can be seen from the evidence on record, the petitioner is said to have suffered fracture to his right leg and also both bones of right leg lower 1/3rd, and he was treated in NIMS and also spent money for treatment. Ex.A.4 is said to be the attested copy of the injury certificate issued by the Government Hospital, Bhongir showing that the petitioner suffered deformity due to the crush injury and there was also fracture of right femur. X-ray Ex.A.5 is also filed. Taking into consideration the same, the lower Tribunal has granted a compensation of Rs.40,000/- for all the injuries. A sum of Rs.3,000/- was granted towards medical expenses and a sum of Rs.10,000/- was granted for pain and suffering. Evidently, the petitioner is said to have been operated and was in hospital for a long time. When the amount of compensation was granted for each injury, the grant of compensation separately for pain and suffering is not warranted. But, the fact remains that the petitioner suffered grievous injury and was hospitalised for a longer time. The medical expenses granted by the lower Tribunal appears to be low and no amount was granted towards loss of earnings. Therefore, taking into consideration the totality of circumstances, I feel the ends of justice would meet if a compensation of Rs.75,000/- is granted instead of Rs.53,000/- as granted by the lower Tribunal. Accordingly, the appeal is allowed. There shall be no order as to costs. _______________________________ JUSTICE N.R.L. NAGESWARA RAO Date:23.09.2011 INL