IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF ANDHRA PRADESH: HYDERABAD FRIDAY, THE TWENTY THIRD DAY OF SEPTEMBER, TWO THOUSAND AND ELEVEN Present: HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE G.V.SEETHAPATHY M.A.C.M.A.No.768 OF 2008 Between: Ponnala Sagar Goud … Appellant And: Md.Asmathuddin and another … Respondents HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE G.V.SEETHAPATHY M.A.C.M.A.No.768 OF 2008 JUDGMENT: This appeal is directed against the award dated 25.10.2007 in O.P.No.276 of 2003, on the file of the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal (IV-Additional District Judge, Fast Track Court), (for short ‘the Tribunal’), Nizamabad, wherein the said claim application filed by the appellant herein for compensation, was allowed-in-part, awarding compensation of Rs.40,000/- with interest at 7.5% per annum. 2. Heard the learned counsel for the appellant/claimant and the learned counsel for the 2nd respondent/insurer. Perused the record. 3. The appellant herein filed the claim application seeking compensation of Rs.3 lakhs for the injuries sustained by him in a motor vehicle accident that occurred on 19.10.2002. According to him, while he was travelling in a jeep bearing No.AP 1 T 5625 from Nirmal to Balkonda, on account of rash and negligent driving of the jeep by its driver, the vehicle dashed against a pedestrian and overturned, resulting in multiple injuries, including fracture of ribs to the claimant. A case was registered against the driver of the jeep who was later prosecuted before the Judicial Magistrate of the First Class, Armoor. 4. The 1st respondent-owner of the jeep remained ex parte and the 2nd respondent-insurer filed a counter opposing the claim and denying their liability to pay the compensation. 5. During enquiry, P.Ws.1 & 2 were examined and Exs.A-1 to A-3 were marked on behalf of the claimant. No oral evidence was adduced, but Ex.B-1 copy of the policy was marked on behalf of the 2nd respondent-insurer. 6. On a consideration of the evidence available on record, the Tribunal held that the accident occurred due to the rash and negligent driving of the jeep by its driver. The said finding has become final as no appeal is filed by the respondents. The Tribunal further held that the claimant is entitled for a total compensation of Rs.40,000/- with interest at 7.5% per annum. Not satisfied with the award, the claimant filed the present appeal, seeking enhancement of the compensation. 7. As seen from the medical evidence of P.W.2, the doctor who treated the claimant, coupled with Ex.A-2 wound certificate and x-ray Ex.A-3, the claimant sustained multiple fractures of ribs, besides two other simple injuries and that he was treated as inpatient in the hospital of P.W.2 for four days from 22.10.2002 to 25.10.2002. The claimant is stated to be a toddy tapper and he claims to have suffered loss of earnings on account of the injuries sustained by him. 8. The Tribunal awarded Rs.10,000/- towards loss of earnings, Rs.5,000/- towards transport charges, Rs.10,000/- for pain and suffering and Rs.15,000/- for the other injuries, totalling to Rs.40,000/-. Having regard to the nature of the injuries sustained, it is considered that the claimant can be awarded some amount towards extra nourishment and attendant charges. The claimant is, therefore, held entitled for a sum of Rs.5,000/- towards extra nourishment and Rs.5,000/- towards attendant charges, making up a total of Rs.50,000/-. The claimant is also entitled for interest on the enhanced amount at 6% per annum from the date of filing of the appeal. The impugned order is modified accordingly. 9. In the result, the civil miscellaneous appeal is allowed to the extent stated above. There shall be no order as to costs. ________________________ G.V.SEETHAPATHY, J 23rd September 2011 Lrkm