THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE N.R.L.NAGESWARA RAO M.A.C.M.A.No. 2556 of 2011 JUDGMENT: The appeal is filed against the order dated 17.01.2005 in M.V.O.P.No.207 of 2000 on the file of the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal-cum-II Additional District Judge, Nellore questioning the quantum of compensation. The petitioner has filed the application for grant of compensation of Rs.2,00,000/- for the injuries received in a motor accident on 17.08.1999, when he was going on his motorcycle, a lorry bearing No.TN-23-B-8787, came in a rash and negligent manner and dashed against the petitioner, as a result of which the petitioner suffered multiple injuries and he was treated at Nellore and also at Madras and suffered medical expenses, loss of earnings and disability. The 1st respondent-owner and the 2nd respondent-insurance company filed counter denying the petition averments, nature of accident, nature of injuries, validity of driving license of the petitioner and liability of the insurance company. After considering the evidence of P.Ws.1 to 3 and Exs.A-1 to A-8 and Ex.B-1, the lower Tribunal has granted compensation of Rs.1,01,500/-. Being not satisfied with the said order, the present appeal is filed. The point for consideration is whether the quantum of compensation granted by the lower Tribunal is just and reasonable? POINT: As can be seen from para No.7 of the order of the lower Tribunal in issue No.3, the petitioner has sustained two injuries and one of them is grievous in nature and examined P.W.3. He was said to be in hospital from 17.07.2000 to 27.07.2000 as per Ex.A-8. He was also said to be treated by P.W.2 at Nellore. The lower Tribunal has considered the same and Rs.15,000/- was granted reasonably towards the pain and suffering. The lower Tribunal considered the medical bills and granted a sum of Rs.73,859.17 ps. considering the treatment for more than six months and a sum of Rs.7,500/- was granted as loss of earnings. The learned counsel for the appellant contends that the petitioner was earning more and the compensation awarded is less and the substance of the contention is that the compensation for medical expenses and compensation for loss of earnings granted by the lower Tribunal are not reasonable. Taking into consideration the nature of treatment and nature of expenditure likely to be incurred by the appellant for treatment at Madras, I feel the ends of justice would meet, if the compensation of Rs.1,25,000/- is granted. Therefore, the compensation is enhanced to Rs.1,25,000/- (Rupees one lakh twenty five thousand only). With the above modification, the appeal is allowed. No costs. ________________________ N.R.L.NAGESWARA RAO, J 31-10-2011 MR THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE N.R.L.NAGESWARA RAO M.A.C.M.A. No. 2556 of 2011 DATE: 31-10-2011 MR