THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE GHULAM MOHAMMED M.A.C.M.A No.4639 of 2008 JUDGMENT: This appeal is filed against the order dated 11.07.2008 passed in O.P.No. 92 of 2006 by the Special Judge for trail of Offences under SCs & STs (POA) Act-cum-VI Additional Metropolitan Sessions Judge-cum-Additional Chairman, MACT- cum-XX Additional Chief Judge, Secunderabad. 2. The said O.P was filed by the claimant/appellant herein seeking compensation of Rs.5,75,000/- for the injuries sustained by him in a motor vehicle accident that occurred on 02.12.2005. As against the claim of Rs.5,75,000/-, the Tribunal awarded total compensation of Rs.2,42,500/-. Hence, this appeal by the claimant. 3. Heard learned counsel for the appellant/claimant and the learned counsel for the respondents. Perused the impugned order passed by the Tribunal. 4. There is no dispute as to the nature and date of the accident and the claimant sustaining injuries in the said accident. To prove the claim, the claimant examined himself as P.W-1 and marked Ex.A-1-copy of First Information Report, Ex.A-2-copy of Charge Sheet registered against the driver of the accident vehicle. The Tribunal, on the question of culpability in causing the accident fixed on the driver of the bus bearing registration No.AP 29 T 3049, which finding does not warrant interference in the facts and circumstances of the case. The doctor who treated the claimant was examined as P.W-2 who is an orthopedic surgeon stated to be working in Yashoda Hospital, Secunderabad. The claimant also examined P.W-3-Plastic Surgeon of the same hospital. The nature of the injuries sustained by the claimant are spoken to by P.W-2. According to P.W-2, the claimant received fracture on the left Tibia and Fibula, crush injury to left foot. Nile left tibia, fixator application for cross leg and all the injuries are grievous in nature. The disability assessed by the doctor is 25% but the Tribunal observed that the disability fixed by P.W-2 was without seeing the case sheet of the claimant. No doubt, no disability certificate is filed by the claimant, in facts and circumstances of the case, the disability can be fixed at 20% considering the nature of injuries sustained by the claimant. It has come in evidence that as on date of the accident that the claimant was aged 45 years and he was doing iron business. Though the claimant stated that he was earning Rs.10,000/- per month, since there is no positive evidence to prove the same, his income can be fixed at Rs.3,500/- per month which annually comes to Rs.42,000/- (3,500 x 12). Appropriate multiplier applicable as per the decision reported in SARALA VERMA VS. DELHI TRANSPORT CORPORATION[1] is ‘14’ when applied, 20% the amount comes to Rs.1,17,600/-. To this amount the claimant is also entitled to medical expenses to the tune of Rs.1,89,500/- as granted by the Tribunal plus an amount of Rs.10,000/- towards pain and suffering totaling to an amount of Rs.3,17,100/-. The claimant is entitled to interest at 6% on the enhanced compensation and 7% on the rest of the amount from the date of petition till realisation. 5. In the result, the impugned award of the Tribunal is modified to the extent indicated above and the appeal is allowed in part. There shall be no order as to costs. ______________________ GHULAM MOHAMMED, J April 7, 2011 SP/NRG THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE GHULAM MOHAMMED M.A.C.M.A No.4639 of 2008 April 7, 2011 SP/NRG [1] 2009 (6) scale 129