HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE RAMESH RANGANATHAN M.A.C.M.A. No.17 of 2005 ORDER: This appeal is preferred against the order of the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Nizamabad in O.P.No.871 of 2000, dated 20.09.2004. The appellants herein are the wife and the children of the deceased Medari Pochanna. On 11.03.2000 when the deceased was going on the road by walk from Bichkunda towards Koulas Village, and had reached the outskirts of Koulas Village at about 6.00 P.M., a motorcycle bearing No.AP-25/D-742 driven at a high speed, and in a rash and negligent manner, came from behind, dashed the deceased resulting in his falling down, and the front wheel of the motor cycle running over him. The deceased sustained fractures to his backbone, wedge compression, dislocation of malls, injuries on the head and other parts of the body. He was first admitted in the Government Headquarters Hospital, Nizamabad and treated by an Orthopaedic Surgeon. He claimed to have been operated upon, and to have been treated in a private hospital, after incurring Rs.1,50,000/-. According to the appellants, as a result of the injury suffered by him, the deceased was not able to move from his bed, do work, and thereby his future earnings and amenities were affected. The appellant claimed Rs.3.00 lakhs as compensation. The Tribunal, in the order under appeal, observed that the motorcycle involved in the accident was insured with the second respondent-Insurance Company and was valid for the period from 18.06.1999 to 17.06.2000; admittedly the accident occurred on 11.03.2000 within the period covered by Ex.A.12 Insurance Policy; Ex.A.3 Wound Certificate, issued by the Civil Assistant Surgeon, Government Headquarters Hospital, Nizamabad, showed that the deceased was admitted in the hospital on 12.03.2000, with fractures, dislocation of C4 and C5 quadriplegia, and was discharged from hospital on 31.03.2000; Ex.A.5 prescription showed that the deceased had received fracture to quadriplegia; Ex.A.8 CT-Scan report revealed anterior fracture of C5 vertebra with decreased disc space to C5, C6 and C7 levels with posterior osteophytic indentation at C6 and C7 levels; the medical evidence produced by the deceased showed that the injured (deceased) sustained fracture of C5 vertebra; Ex.A.13 CT Scan films and Ex.A.14 X-ray films revealed fracture of C5 vertebra; and the medical evidence produced clearly showed that the deceased Pochanna had received fracture to his C5 vertebra. The Tribunal further observed that the injured had also taken treatment at the Tirumala Hospital, Nizamabad, and at Krishna Orthopaedic and Accident Hospital, Nanded for more than a month; the injured died two years after the accident; there was no medical evidence to prove that the deceased took medical treatment till his death, and had died due to the injuries received by him; and, as no postmortem was conducted soon after the death of the deceased, it could not be held that the injured had died only due to the injuries received in the accident. The Tribunal further held that the medical evidence clearly indicated that the deceased had sustained fracture of C5 vertebra; he took treatment in various hospitals; and he must have incurred expenditure for his treatment. Considering the nature of injuries, the Tribunal considered it reasonable to award Rs.35,000/- towards loss of estate; Rs.5,000/- towards medical expenses; and, in all, awarded a sum of Rs.40,000/- with interest at 9% p.a. from the date of petition till the date of realization. The claimants before the Tribunal are in appeal before this Court. Sri P.Radhive Reddy, Learned Counsel for the appellants, would contend that while a meager sum of Rs.5,000/- was awarded towards medical expenses, Ex.A.7 receipt issued by the Life Linc Hospital, Nanded for Rs.2,100/-; Ex.A.8 C.T. Scan Report; Ex.A.13 C.T. Scan films (6); and Ex.A.14 X-ray films (2); would show that the deceased underwent C.T. Scan, and had incurred a huge sum towards his medical expenses. The documents produced before the Tribunal would itself show that the medical expenses incurred by the claimants herein would have far exceeded the sum of Rs.5,000/- which was awarded by the Tribunal. I consider it appropriate, therefore, to enhance the medical expenses from Rs.5,000/- to Rs.15,000/-. The injury sustained by the deceased was a fracture to one of his vertebra. The contention that the deceased was confined to his bed does accord with the medical evidence produced before the Tribunal. It is the case of the appellants that the deceased was earning Rs.60,000/- p.a. by way of doing agricultural and cattle business. I consider it appropriate, therefore, to award Rs.10,000/- towards loss of earnings, Rs.5,000/- towards pain and suffering and Rs.5,000/- towards attendant and transport charges. The compensation awarded by the Tribunal of Rs.40,000/- is enhanced to Rs.70,000/- which the petitioner shall be entitled to be paid. The order of the Tribunal directing payment of interest at 9% p.a. on the compensation of Rs.40,000/-, from the date of the petition till the date of realization, is confirmed. The second respondent- Insurance Company shall, in addition, pay Rs.30,000/- with interest at 7.5% from the date of the petition till the date of realization. The Civil Miscellaneous Appeal is allowed to the extent indicated above. No order as to costs. RAMESH RANGANATHAN,J Date:02.09.2010 usd