IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD THURSDAY, THIS THE 5th DAY OF AUGUST, 2010 CIVIL MISCELLANEOUS APPEAL No.1007 of 2003 Between United India Insurance Co. Ltd., rep. by its Sr. Divisional Manager …APPELLANT(S) A N D Konganti Ramakrishna and another …RESPONDENT(S) THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE D.S.R.VARMA CIVIL MISCELLANEOUS APPEAL No.1007 of 2003 ORAL JUDGMENT: Heard both sides. 2. Challenging the quantum of compensation awarded by the Motor Vehicle Accidents Claims Tribunal-cum-I Additional District Judge, R.R. District at L.B.Nagar, Hyderabad (for brevity “the Tribunal”), in O.P.No.693 of 2000, by order and decree, dated 25.09.2002, for the injuries suffered by the petitioner therein, in a road accident that occurred on 09.12.1999, the appellant-United India Insurance Company Limited has filed the present Civil Miscellaneous Appeal. 3. Appellant is the insurer, 1st respondent is the claimant and 2nd respondent is the owner of offending vehicle i.e., lorry. 4. The particulars regarding the method and manner in which the accident took place and the rash and negligence etc., are not referred to herein, as they are not in dispute. 5. The Tribunal, after appreciating the evidence on record, both oral and documentary, awarded a sum of Rs.2,00,873/- towards compensation to the claimant for the injuries suffered by him in the accident. 6. The only point that arises for consideration, in this appeal, is whether the quantum of compensation awarded by the Tribunal is proper and justified? 7. I have carefully gone through the impugned award, along with other material, available on record. It is observed that the claimant claimed a total compensation of Rs.2,50,000/- under Section 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988. The Tribunal, having elaborately dealt with all the aspects, including the income of the claimant, the nature of injuries, the number of injuries and the duration of treatment, came to the conclusion that the claimant is entitled to Rs.50,000/- towards pain and suffering and disability, Rs.1,22,185/- towards medical expenses and Rs.28,688/- towards loss of income, and awarded a total compensation of Rs.2,00,873/- . Therefore, I do not find any ground to interfere with the reasons recorded by the Tribunal, while granting the compensation, and there is no illegality or irregularity in the impugned order. 8. However, having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case, I am of the opinion that the rate of interest awarded by the Tribunal at the rate of 9% per annum is on higher side. Therefore, the same is reduced from 9% to 7.5% per annum from the date of filing of the claim petition till the date of realisation. In all other aspects and respects, the impugned order and decree shall remain unaltered. 9. In the result, the Civil Miscellaneous Appeal is allowed in part, to the extent indicated above. However, there shall be no order as to costs. _________________ D.S.R.VARMA, J 05th AUGUST 2010 CVRK