THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE K.S.APPA RAO M.A.C.M.A.No.679 of 2008 JUDGMENT: Aggrieved by the order dated 16-10-2007 in M.V.O.P.No.1119 of 2005 on the file of the Motor Vehicles Accidents Claims Tribunal- cum-III Additional District Judge, Guntur (for brevity ‘the Tribunal’), the present C.M.A. is filed. 2. The appellant herein is the petitioner before the Tribunal below. She made a claim of Rs.2.00 lakhs for the injuries sustained by her in road traffic accident and the Tribunal below while assessing the evidence on record awarded an amount of Rs.28,000/- under all heads. Being aggrieved, the present C.M.A. is filed. 3. The learned counsel for the appellant mainly urged that the Tribunal below without taking into consideration the evidence of P.W.2 and Ex.A-3, wound certificate and A-6 medical bills, awarded a meager compensation of Rs.28,000/- and sought for the enhancement of compensation by placing reliance on the evidence of P.W.2, Dr.Ch.Venkata Swamy. 4. Now the point for consideration is whether the appellant is entitled for enhancement of compensation? 5. It is the case of the appellant that on 16-09-2005, she met with an accident in which she sustained injuries. Thereafter, she was admitted in a hospital and took treatment. In support of her evidence, in proving the accident, she filed Ex.A-1, certified copy of F.I.R. and Ex.A-2, certified copy of charge sheet. On perusal of the aforesaid documents, the police after due investigation, held that the accident was due to rash and negligent driving of the driver of the offending vehicle. The factum of accident is not disputed in this appeal. 6. According to P.W.1, she sustained an abrasion of 2 x 2 cm over the right fore arm, an abrasion of 2 x 1 cm over the right shoulder, a small abrasion over the right cheek, a lacerated injury over the scalp measuring 3 x 4 cm ‘c’ shaped. C.T. scan brain was taken and brain was normal and no bone injury was reported. According to her, she was treated by Dr.Suddaru Rao and Dr.M.V.N. Prasad. She filed O.P. Card issued by Govt. General Hospital, Guntur, under Prof. Dr. M.Prasanth, wherein it is mentioned that on 30-09-2005, she was admitted and a surgery was conducted on 02-11-2005 and was discharged on 14-11-2005. She was also examined by P.W.2, Dr.Ch.Venkata Swamy. As per the evidence of P.W.2, on 30-09-2005, the petitioner was admitted in Government General Hospital, Guntur and on 02-11-2005, he attended skin grafting to right shoulder and she was discharged on 14-11-2005. It is also his evidence that she was initially admitted in general surgery ward on 16- 09-2005 for multiple injuries and that she was attended surgery for Acromio Clavicular Disruption right side with external injury. He marked Ex.A-5, O.P. chit. He also certified that petitioner has got Acroclavicular Disruption with complete restriction of right shoulder movements and her right shoulder is sagged downwards and assessed disability as 50%. He also certified that the petitioner cannot attend to any work with right hand. 7. The petitioner, as per his evidence, is a coolly and eking out her livelihood as that profession. Due to restriction of movements as spoken by P.W.2, she is deprived of the income. Therefore any amount of compensation will not serve the suffering of the injured. The Tribunal below failed to appreciate the evidence of P.W.2 together with evidence of P.W.1 that the claimant is admitted in hospital for multiple injuries and she was operated and thus she has got Acroclavicular Disruption with complete restriction of right shoulder movements and the right shoulder of the claimant is sagged downwards while granting compensation. 8. Therefore, in any view of the matter, the award of compensation granted by the Tribunal is very meager. However, while taking into consideration the gravity of the injuries, granting of Rs.25,000/- towards the injuries sustained by P.W.1 besides granting of Rs.15,000/- towards pain and suffering, Rs.5,000/- towards medical expenses, Rs.2,000/- towards transportation, Rs.3,000/- towards extra nourishment and Rs.3,000/- towards loss of income is just and reasonable. In total, the appellant is entitled to a total sum of Rs.53,000/- (Rupees fifty three thousand only). 9. With this modification, the appeal is allowed in part enhancing the compensation from Rs.28,000/- to Rs.53,000/-. The enhanced amount shall carry interest @ 6% per annum from the date of petition till the date of realization. No costs. _________________ K.S.APPA RAO,J Date: 21st July, 2011 kvr