THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE K.S. APPA RAO C.M.A.No.2073 of 2003 JUDGMENT: The C.M.A. is preferred aggrieved by the order and decree dated 17.1.2003 passed in M.V.O.P.No. 228 of 1999 on the file of the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal-cum-IV Addl. District Judge, East Godavari, Kakinada. The facts of the case in brief are as follows: That on 31.10.1998 at about 7 p.m. while the deceased Ayenavali Ramakrishna was walking on the left side of the road to reach Venkateshwaraswamy Temple, the crime vehicle APSRTC bus came in a rash and negligent manner at high speed dashed the deceased and the bus front tyre ran over the left leg of the deceased due to which the deceased sustained crush injuries to his left leg and immediately he was shifted in the same bus to G.G.H. Kakinada, where the deceased died on 27.2.1999 while undergoing treatment. Learned counsel for the appellant urged though the appellant proved her case both by oral and documentary evidence much less Ex.A-2, the lower Court granted very meager amount and urged for enhancement of compensation. Now the point for consideration is whether the order of the lower Court is sustainable and appellant is entitled for enhancement of compensation? M.V.O.P.No. 228 of 1999 is filed claiming compensation of Rs. 1,50,000/- for the death of the deceased Rama Krishna, but the lower Court granted a sum of Rs. 50,000/- towards the injury sustained by the injured on the ground that the claimant failed to produce the postmortem certificate to show that the injured died while undergoing treatment. I have seen from the records that it is an admitted fact that the deceased succumbed to the injuries received in a road traffic accident. To prove the injuries sustained by the deceased in the aforesaid accident, the claimants examined P.W-3 Dr. Ch. Hanumantha Rao and got marked Ex.A-2, copy of wound certificate and Ex.X-1 case sheet. The lower Court has observed that the deceased admitted in the hospital for crush injuries sustained to his left leg and same is supported with the evidence of the doctor (P.W-3) and Ex.X-1, case sheet. It is also proved through the evidence of P.W-3 that the injured underwent surgery and thereafter died. The evidence of P.W-3, is of paramount importance in this case. He noticed both the bones of left leg lower and upper were fractured and the injury showed the crush injury. Admittedly, the deceased is about 40 years on the date of the accident. The lower Court discussed the evidence of P.Ws.1 to 3 in detail and awarded a compensation of Rs. 50,000/- towards the crush injuries sustained by the deceased. But, on over all scrutiny of evidence of P.W-3 coupled with the documentary evidence, it can be said that the injuries sustained by the injured is crush injury and one cannot stand comfortably even after the injuries are cured. Moreover, the proximate death of the deceased was immediately after the accident clearly reads the gravity of the injuries sustained by him in the accident. Therefore, viewed from any angle and also in the totality of circumstances and also on humanitarian grounds granting of Rs. 75,000/- against the compensation Rs. 50,000/- granted by the lower Court is just and reasonable. Accordingly, the said amount is granted. The enhanced compensation shall carry interest @ 6% per annum from the date of the petition till the date of realization. With this modification, the C.M.A. is partly allowed. No order as to costs. Print the name of Mr. K. Satyanarayana Murthy. ___________________ 3.2.2011 CHV