THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE P. SWAROOP REDDY C.M.A.No.3515 OF 2003 JUDGMENT: This civil miscellaneous appeal is filed against the judgment of the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Ranga Reddy District, in O.P.No.696/99. Claimant is the appellant. According to him, he was working as Quality Controller in V.S.T., Hyderabad on a monthly salary of Rs.10,000/-. 2. Heard. 3. The brief facts are as follows: On 19.05.1999 at about 3.40 p.m. the petitioner was crossing the road with his bicycle in front of Viceroy Hotel, Tankbund road, Hyderabad, at that time, an auto bearing No.AP 10U-697 came in a rash and negligent manner, dashed his bicycle, on account of that he suffered fracture of his right femur. He was shifted to CDR Hospital, Hyderabad. A case in Cr.No.166 of 1999 was registered for the accident. He spent Rs.40,000/- for treatment. He claimed compensation of Rs.4.00 lakhs. Second respondent filed counter denying the allegations of the petition. On the basis of above pleadings, the following issues were framed: 1. Whether the accident occurred on 19.05.1999 in front of Viceroy Hotel, Tankbund Road, Hyderabad, due to the rash and negligent driving of the Auto bearing No.AP 10U 697? 2. Whether the petitioners are entitled to any compensation, if so, how much? 3. To what relief? Additional Issues: 1. Whether the petitioner availed the benefit under Group Insurance Scheme under E.S.I. Act and the United India Insurance Company, Division Office No.3, Hyderabad, paid the amount for the injuries sustained by the petitioner in the said accident? 2. If so, whether the petitioner is entitled to claim compensation under the M.V.Act as prayed for? On behalf of the petitioner, the petitioner himself was examined as P.W.1 and Exs.A1 to A21 were marked apart from Ex.B1 copy of policy. Considering the material on record, the court below awarded compensation of Rs.1,74,612/-. Aggrieved by the same, the present appeal is filed. 4. Now, the point for consideration is, whether the petitioner is entitled for higher compensation? 5. According to the claim petition, the petitioner received fracture of right femur and multiple fractures/injuries all over the body. He spent Rs.40,000/- for treatment. He claimed compensation of Rs.4.00 lakhs. Petitioner filed medical bills for Rs.86,000/-. As such, obviously it has to be assumed that those medical bills are incorrect, as according to the petitioner, he spent an amount of Rs.40,000/- for treatment. Though the petitioner might have undergone treatment, for that, he had sufficiently compensated, he is also awarded compensation for the loss of earnings during the period of treatment, for pain and suffering and other heads. Thus, for one fracture suffered by the petitioner, the compensation of Rs.1,74,612/- awarded cannot be said to be inadequate, on the other hand it is some what on higher side in the circumstances of the case. 6. In the circumstances, I see no merits in this appeal and there are no grounds to further enhance the compensation and the appeal is liable to be dismissed. 7. Accordingly, C.M.A. is dismissed. No costs. ______________________ P. SWAROOP REDDY, J. 19th November 2010, Rns