THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE GHULAM MOHAMMED CMA No.282 OF 2001 Jayapal V. Binok Kumar and another THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE GHULAM MOHAMMED CMA No.282 OF 2001. Oral Judgment : 1) This Civil Miscellaneous Appeal is preferred by the claimant seeking enhancement of the compensation awarded by the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal-cum-Additional District Judge, Medak at Sangareddy. 2) The facts in brief are that the appellant-claimant while returning on Cycle from Muthangi towards Isnapur after distributing the wedding cards of his sister and when he reached near Isnapur, a lorry bearing no. ADT 7615 came in rash and negligent manner, at high speed, dashed the appellant from behind as a result of which the appellant received grievous injuries to his right leg, and injuries on other parts of the body, and that the right leg of the appellant was fractured. The appellant therefore filed O.P. seeking compensation of Rs.1,00,000/-. 3) Before the Tribunal, the owner of the lorry remained ex-parte, the 2nd respondent-insurance company filed counter denying the averments of the claim petition. On the basis of the rival claims, appropriate issues were framed and evidence was adduced by the parties. 4) The Tribunal on evidence came to the conclusion that the driver of the lorry drove it in a rash and negligent manner and dashed the cyclist causing injuries to the appellant. The respondents did not choose to examine the driver of the lorry, and considering the circumstances of the case, I see no reason to interfere with the said finding of fact arrived at by the Tribunal. 5) With regard to quantum of compensation, it is in the evidence that the appellant-claimant was in Gandhi hospital for one month for treatment of multiple injuries and fracture of Libial spine with raw area anterior medial aspect of right knee, and that skin grafting surgery was also done and plaster cast was applied. During the treatment the appellant’s right leg was also operated. Thereafter, the appellant also took treatment in NIMS hospital at Hyderabad as per Ex.A.6. As per the evidence of doctor P.W.2, the appellant was not able to walk properly without the assistance of the stick and he cannot bend the knee joint. P.W.2-doctor certified that the disability of the appellant is 20% to 25%, and it is permanent in nature and there will be pain for long. 6) Considering the nature of injuries sustained by the claimant-appellant, and also the percentage of disability, this court is of the view that the quantum of compensation of Rs.30,000/- granted by the Tribunal is on lower side and on the other hand the amount of compensation of Rs.1,00,000/- sought by the appellant is justified, as no amount was granted towards pain and suffering and according to the appellant he incurred medical expenditure to the tune of Rs.30,000/-. Even otherwise, since the claimant is aged about 25 years at the time of accident and if the percentage of disability of 25% is applied to the average nominal income of a person and the appropriate multiplier 18, as per the Second Schedule to the Act, the claimant is entitled to the amount what he has claimed. 7) In the circumstances, the appeal is allowed granting total compensation of Rs.1,00,000/- on all counts, with 7.5 % interest per annum from the date of petition till realization on the enhanced amount. No costs. GM, J Kk/17-6-2010 THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE GHULAM MOHAMMED CMA No.948 OF 2001 17-6-2010 17-6-2010