HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE P. SWAROOP REDDY M.A.C.M.A. No.782 OF 2005 JUDGMENT: Being dissatisfied with the quantum of compensation awarded in O.P. No.676 of 2003 vide order dated 12-10-2004 by the learned Chairman, Motor Accident Claims Tribunal – cum – I Additional District Judge, Karimnagar, claimant preferred this Civil Miscellaneous Appeal seeking enhancement of compensation. 2. The driver of the APSRTC bus bearing No.AAZ – 1797 involved in the accident and APSRTC are respondent Nos.1 and 2 respectively in the O.P. before the Tribunal. 3. For the sake of convenience, the parties are referred to as referred in the O.P. before the Tribunal. 4. The case of the claimant before the Tribunal is that on 16-07-2003 while he was proceeding on his Suzuki motorcycle from Kothapalli to Karimnagar, near SRR Government Degree College crossroads, APSRTC bus bearing No.AAZ - 1797 being driven by its driver, respondent No.1, in a rash and negligent manner and high speed, dashed against his motorcycle, as a result, he fell down and sustained injuries on his left calf, foot, right knee, thigh and leg and lost consciousness. Immediately, he was shifted to the Hospital of Dr. Sridhar Rao, Kairmnagar and there he took treatment for several days and spent Rs.40,000/- for treatment. After discharge from the hospital, he was advised to take bed rest for two months. He was a practicing advocate earning Rs.5,000/- per month. Hence, he claimed a compensation of Rs.2,00,000/- for the injuries sustained by him in the accident. 5. Respondent No.1, driver of the bus, remained ex parte and respondent No.2 – APSRTC alone filed its counter denying the case of the claimant. 6. Based on the pleadings, the following issues were framed for trial by the Tribunal: “1. Whether the accident has occurred due to rash and negligent driving of the vehicle bearing No.AAZ-1797 by R.1. 2. Whether the petitioner is entitled to recover compensation and if so to what amount and from whom. 3. To what relief.” 7. To prove his case, claimant got examined himself as PW.1 and the doctor, who treated him, as PW.2 and got marked Exs.A-1 to A-8. On behalf of the respondents, respondent No.1 got examined himself as RW.1 but no documents were marked. 8. Based on the evidence on record and after an elaborate consideration of the same, Tribunal awarded a compensation of Rs.45,000/- to the claimant fixing the liability on both the respondents to pay the compensation jointly and severally with interest at 9% per annum. Being dissatisfied with the quantum of compensation, claimant preferred this appeal seeking enhancement of compensation. 9. Since neither of the respondents preferred any appeal or cross-objections, there is no need to decide the question of proving the accident and their liability for payment of compensation to the claimant. 10. Hence, now the only point that arises for consideration is whether the compensation awarded by the Tribunal to the claimant is inadequate ? 11. Evidence of the claimant as PW.1 is that he sustained injuries on the left leg and was shifted to the hospital of PW.2 and there he took treatement as inpatient for 13 days and plastic surgery was conducted to his leg and advised bed rest for three months. Whereas, evidence of PW.2, who treated the claimant, is that claimant was admitted in his hospital with crush injury involving the right leg and lacerated wound over left foot. Claimant was operated by a plastic surgeon on 19-07-2003 and during surgery, skin grafting was done and he was discharged on 28-07-2003. In the light of the above evidence, Tribunal awarded Rs.10,000/- towards pain and suffering, Rs.28,692/- towards medical expenses and Rs.6,000/- towards loss of income, totalling to Rs.44,692/- and the same was rounded off to Rs.45,000/-. 12. Considering the nature of injuries sustained by the claimant, I am of the view that the compensation awarded by the Tribunal cannot be said to be inadequate. However, since the evidence of PW.2, medical practitioner, is that claimant has undergone plastic surgery and skin grafting etc., were done, he must have suffered pain, as such, another Rs.5,000/- (Rupees five thousand only) can be awarded to the claimant towards pain and suffering and the same is accordingly awarded. Accordingly, the compensation of Rs.45,000/- awarded by the Tribunal to the claimant is enhanced to Rs.50,000/- (Rupees fifty thousand only) which he can withdraw soon after its deposit. The interest on the enhanced compensation shall be at 6% per annum from the date of O.P. till realization. 13. With the above directions, the Civil Miscellaneous Appeal is allowed in part. No order as to costs. ____________________ P. SWAROOP REDDY, J December 3, 2010. PV