HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE K.S.APPA RAO M.A.C.M.A.No.1969 of 2008 Date: 08-7-2011 Between United India Insurance Company, Rep. by its Branch Manager, Branch Office, Dwaraka Towers, 7 Roads, Kadapa Town, Kadapa … Appellant/Respondent No.2 and Varapalli Narasimhulu … Respondent/Claimant P.Ramesh Babu and another … Respondents/Respondents 1 and 3 HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE K.S.APPA RAO M.A.C.M.A.No.1969 of 2008 Judgment: Being aggrieved by the order and decree dated 06-8-2007 in M.V.O.P.No.574 of 2004 on the file of the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal cum IV Additional District Judge, Kadapa, Kadapa district the present civil miscellaneous appeal is filed by the appellant-Insurance Company. 2. The appellant herein is the 2nd respondent in M.V.O.P.No.574 of 2004 before the tribunal below. The 1st respondent-claimant filed the said O.P., claiming compensation of Rs.5,00,000/- for the injuries sustained by him in a road traffic accident that occurred on 28/29-12-2003. The tribunal below, while assessing the evidence on record, awarded compensation of Rs.4,16,828/- under all heads. Being aggrieved, the present civil miscellaneous appeal is filed by the Insurance Company. 3. The learned Standing Counsel for the appellant-Insurance Company mainly urged that the tribunal below wrongly applied the multiplier ‘18’ instead of ‘17’ and placed reliance on the judgment of the apex Court in SARLA VERMA v. DTC[1]. He also urged that the tribunal below granted Rs.50,000/- towards permanent disability, which is erroneous in view of granting of compensation of Rs.2,72,160/- towards the loss of earning power or loss of estate and sought for reduction of the compensation. 4. The learned counsel for the 1st respondent-claimant supported the finding of the tribunal below. 5. Now, the point for consideration is -- whether the award of compensation granted by the tribunal below is reasonable ? 6 . Point:- According to P.W.1 the injured, he sustained the following injuries: (1) Fracture of left femur, proximal 1 1/3; (2) Fracture of right femur in Sub-trochanteric region; (3) Right posterial frontal scalp contusion; (4) Left occipital scalp contusion with laceration; (5) Left hemiplegia; (6) Small abrasion at base of left little finger; (7) Grazed abrasion with bleeding over left foot. It is his further evidence that he was treated in different hospitals from 20-01-2004 to 03-4-2004. 7. Admittedly, the petitioner is aged 29 years on the date of accident. Ex.X-1 is the disability certificate, which reads that the petitioner had sustained 60% disability and the same is certified by the doctor P.W.2. While taking into consideration the evidence of P.W.2 and the documentary evidence Exs.A-2 and X-1, the tribunal below granted Rs.64,668/- towards the treatment and medicines, Rs.5,000/- towards extra nourishment, Rs.10,000/- towards transportation charges, Rs.15,000/- towards pain and suffering, inconvenience and for attendant charges, Rs.50,000/- towards the permanent disability and Rs.2,72,160/- towards the loss of earning power or loss of estate. 8. Admittedly, the petitioner sustained multiple fractures and simple injuries. As seen from the impugned order, only Rs.15,000/- was granted towards pain and suffering though the tribunal below has taken into consideration that there are multiple grievous injuries and permanent disability at 60%. Therefore, any amount of compensation on that score will not compensate the suffering of the injured. However, having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case, gravity of the injuries and the suffering of the injured and also the age of the injured, granting of Rs.50,000/- towards compensation to the grievous injuries, not under the said head but granted under the head of pain and suffering. However, the impugned order passed by the tribunal below awarding total compensation of Rs.4,16,828/- is very much just and reasonable. 9. The tribunal below applied the multiplier ‘18’ for the age group of 29 years but the multiplier ‘17’ is to be applied as per the judgment of the apex Court in SARLA VERMA’s case (supra). If the same is applied, the loss of earning power of the injured or loss of estate comes to Rs.2,57,040/- [Rs.70 x 30 x 12 x 17 x 60/100] instead of Rs.2,72,160/- granted by the tribunal below. 10. With this modification, the civil miscellaneous appeal is allowed in part reducing the amount of compensation awarded by the tribunal below from Rs.4,16,828/- to Rs.4,01,708/- (Rupees four lakhs, one thousand, seven hundred and eight only) with interest at the rate of 7.5% per annum from the date of petition till the date of payment. No costs. ___________________ K.S.APPA RAO, J. 08th July, 2011. Ak HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE K.S.APPA RAO M.A.C.M.A.No.1969 of 2008 08th July, 2011. [1] (2009) 6 SCC 121