THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE GHULAM MOHAMMED MACMA NO. 212 OF 2006 JUDGMENT: This appeal is filed by the appellant under Section 173 of Motor Vehicles Act, 1989, against the award passed in O.P.No.398 of 2002, dated 19.11.2004, on the file of the Special Judge for Trial of Cases under E.C. Act- cum-III Additional Metropolitan Sessions Judge-cum XVII Additional Chief Judge (MACT), Hyderabad. 2. The brief facts of the case are that, on the intervening night of 3/4-1-2002, when the petitioner was returning from Sirsilla to Hyderabad in Ambassador car bearing registration No.AHT 6800, due to the rash and negligent driving of the driver of the car, the car hit a tree near the limits of Gouraram village, due to which the petitioner received serious injuries and fractures. Immediately after the accident, the petitioner was admitted in Gandhi Hospital, Secunderabad and later he was shifted to Geetha Nursing Home, Marredpally, Secunderabad. He spent huge amounts for treatment, medicines, transportation etc. Hence, he filed the said O.P.No.398 of 2002 claiming a compensation of Rs.4,00,000/- initially and subsequently filed an amendment petition to enhance an additional amount of Rs.6,00,000/-, totaling to Rs.10,00,000/-, to be payable by the owner and insurer of the car respectively by which he travelled. By the impugned order, the lower Court awarded an amount of Rs. 4,00,000/-. Aggrieved by the same, the present appeal is filed by the appellant-claimant. 3. The first respondent-owner of the crime vehicle remained ex parte. The second respondent-insurer filed counter denying the occurrence of the accident, his monthly earnings and the nature of injuries sustained by the petitioner. 4. On the basis of the above pleadings, the Tribunal framed the following issues for trial: 1. Whether the accident in question took place due to rash and negligent driving of driver of Ambassador car bearing registration No.AHT 6800 by its driver on the intervening night of 3/4-1–2002? 2. Whether the petitioner is entitled to the compensation. If so, to what amount and from whom? 3. To what relief? 5. On behalf of the claimant, P.Ws.1, 2 and 3 were examined and Exs.A-1 to A-15 were marked. On behalf of the respondents, no evidence was adduced, but Ex.B-1-Insurance Policy copy was marked. Since R-1, owner of the car remained ex parte, and there was no other evidence adduced by R-2 except Ex.B-1 Insurance copy, placing reliance on Ex.A-1 and PWs.1 and 2, the Tribunal held that the accident occurred due to the rash and negligent driving of the driver of the vehicle in question and granted compensation. Learned counsel for the claimant contended that P.W.3-Orthopeadic Surgeon who treated the claimant deposed that the claimant suffered 70% disability and also stated that the appellant-claimant suffered shortening of right leg by one inch and also suffered from restricted movement of right and left hip and he is limping, and thus the claimant is facing difficulty in squatting, sitting cross-legged and thereby unable to walk without crutches and there are steel rod implants present in the right femur, as such he has to undergo anther operation for removal of steel rod from the right femur. In the circumstances, the compensation needs to be enhanced. 6. Considering the submission of the learned counsel for the petitioner that the permanent disability assessed by the doctor was 70% whereas Tribunal took the disability at 25% without proper reasons, the matter requires proper appreciation of evidence of the Orthopeadic Surgeon by the Tribunal. More so, the Tribunal if the facts so warrant may take into consideration the evidence on record and shall dispose of the same as per law. 7. Subject to above directions, the matter is remanded back to the Tribunal for fresh adjudication and disposal considering the evidence if any within a period of three months. 8. In the result, the appeal is allowed and the matter is remanded back to the Tribunal. There shall be no order as to costs. ___________________ GHULAM MOHAMMED, J March 03,2011 SP/KK HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE GHULAM MOHAMMED MACMA NO. 212 OF 2006 March 03, 2011 KK/SP