IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, :: HYDERABAD MONDAY, THE TWENTY SIXTH DAY OF SEPTEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND ELEVEN PRESENT: HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE G.V.SEETHAPATHY M.A.C.M.A.No.805 OF 2008 Between: Bandela Posani …Appellant A n d A.Chinna Bojanna and another ...Respondents HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE G.V.SEETHAPATHY M.A.C.M.A.No.805 OF 2008 JUDGMENT: This appeal is directed against the judgment dated 30-10-2007 in O.P.No.2002 of 2002, on the file of the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal (II-Additional District Judge, Fast Track Court), (for short ‘the Tribunal’), Nizamabad, wherein the said appeal filed by the appellant herein seeking compensation was allowed-in-part, awarding compensation of Rs.75,140/- with interest at 7.5% per annum from the date of petition. 2. Heard both sides. Perused the records. 3. The appellant herein filed the claim application seeking compensation of Rs.4 lakhs for the injuries sustained by the claimant in a motor vehicle accident that occurred on 26-11-2002. According to her, she was waking along side National Highway No.7 in Shivar limits of Balkonda and that a scooter bearing No.AP 25 H 1380, driven in a rash and negligent manner at high speed dashed against the appellant resulting in multiple fractures and that she was taken to Aparna Hospital, Armoor where she underwent treatment, including surgery. She further pleaded that she is a vegetable and fruit vendor, earning Rs.12,000/- per month and on account of the injuries sustained by her in the accident, she lost her livelihood. 4. The 1st respondent-owner of the vehicle remained ex parte. The 2nd respondent-insurer filed written statement opposing the claim and denying their liability to pay the compensation. 5. During enquiry, P.Ws.1 and 2 were examined and Exs.A-1 to A-7 were marked on behalf of the claimant. No oral evidence was adduced, but Ex.B-1 copy of the policy was marked on behalf of the insurer. 6. On a consideration of the evidence available on record, the Tribunal held that the accident occurred due to the rash and negligent driving of the scooter by its rider. The said finding has become final as no appeal is filed by the respondents. The Tribunal awarded a total compensation of Rs.75,140/- with interest at 7.5% per annum from the date of petition. Not satisfied with the award, the claimant preferred the present appeal. 7. As seen from the medical evidence available on record, the claimant sustained fracture of right leg, fracture of right side ribs, fracture of skull, fracture of shaft right fibula and she also lost four teeth. P.W.2, the doctor, who treated the claimant issued wound certificate Ex.A-3 and prescriptions Ex.A-4. The evidence on record shows that during the course of treatment, the claimant has undergone surgery also for internal fixation by nailing. The claimant was in hospital from 26.11.2002 to 06.12.2002 as inpatient. The evidence of P.W.2 coupled with Ex.A-3 wound certificate and Ex.A-6 x-ray show that the claimant sustained three fracture injuries, besides loss of two teeth which are all grievous injuries. 8. Having regard to the nature and number of grievous injuries sustained by the claimant, she is entitled for compensation at Rs.20,000/- for the four grievous injures at the rate of Rs.5,000/- per each injury. Though the claimant pleaded that she spent Rs.1,50,000/- for treatment, she filed medical bills Ex.A-5 only to the extent of Rs.11,140/-. The Tribunal has, therefore, rightly awarded the said amount. The amount of Rs.3,000/- awarded by the tribunal towards transport charges and Rs.2,000/- for extra nourishment are, however, considered to be low. Having regard to the nature of the injuries and also the length of hospitalization during which she had to undergo surgery, it is considered that the claimant can be awarded a sum of Rs.5,000/- towards transport charges, Rs.5,000/- towards extra nourishment and Rs.5,000/- towards attendant charges. The Tribunal awarded Rs.9,000/- towards loss of past earnings for 10 days for a period of four months. The claimant is stated to be a vegetable and fruit vendor. She can be reasonably expected to earn on an average of Rs.100/- per day. At that rate for a period of 4 months of recuperation, she would be entitled for a sum of Rs.12,000/- towards loss of earnings. The Tribunal awarded Rs.40,000/- towards injuries presumably for the disability that resulted from the injuries sustained by the claimant. The respondents have not filed any appeal questioning the same. The claimant has not filed any certificate of physical disability issued by a competent medical board assessing the nature and extent of physical disability that resulted from the injuries. However, the fact remains that even assuming that the fracture injuries might have healed, still the loss of teeth would certainly deprive the claimant of her ability to speak and chew for ever. With the loss of teeth, the claimant would not be in a position to speak or eat food as before and the functional capability of the mouth would certainly get reduced permanently, though partially. The claimant is, therefore, entitled for some amount of compensation towards loss of amenities of life on account of loss of teeth. The amount of Rs.40,000/- awarded by the Tribunal is, therefore, left undisturbed. Thus, the claimant would be entitled for a total compensation of Rs.98,000/- with interest at 7.5% per annum on the original amount awarded by the Tribunal from the date of petition and at 6% per annum from the date of appeal. The impugned award is modified accordingly. 10. In the result, the civil miscellaneous appeal is allowed to the extent stated above. There shall be no order as to costs. ________________________ G.V.SEETHAPATHY, J 26th September 2011 Lrkm