( 1 ) HEARD both the counsel.

( 2 ) AGGRIEVED by the order and decree dated 29. 3. 2001 passed by the Court of the Chairman Motor Accidents Claims tribunal (III Additional District Judge), warangal in M. V. O. P. No. 888 of 1999 the andhra Pradesh State Road Transport 'corporation (for short 'the Corporation') filed the present appeal.

( 3 ) THE case of the claimant is that he was working as Ghumastha (clerk) and eaming an amount of Rs. 1,500/- per month. On 18. 1. 1998 while he was going on scooter bearing No. ATS 7656 from Hanamakonda to Warangal, bus of the Corporation bearing no. AP 9z 8724 came in the opposite direction and hit the scooter and as a result he received grievous injuries to the head and fracture of his left leg and immediately he was shifted to M. G. M. Hospital, warangal for treatment and that he was treated at M. G. M. Hospital, Warangal and also at private hospitals and he spent an amount of Rs. 45,000/- towards medicines and extra nourishment and that he became permanently disabled and that he was bed ridden for 12 months and lost his job due to the accident. Therefore he filed claim petition claiming an amount of Rs. 2,00,000/ -.

( 4 ) THE Corporation filed counter and denied the averments in the claim petition and stated that at the time of accident there was heavy rush on the said road and the road widening works were taking place and the bus of the Corporation was coming on the left side of the road and due to traffic jam the bus was stopped on the left side of the road and at that time the claimant and two others came on the scooter in high speed and unable to control the scooter as it was over leaded with three persons the claimant fell down on the road widening drench and received injuries. At the time of accident, the claimant and another were under the influence of intoxication. The claimant's scooter not even touched the bus of the Corporation and the claimant and two others received injuries at their own fault but not due to the fault of the driver of the Corporation. With these averments inter alia the claim petition was sought to be dismissed.

( 5 ) ON the basis of the above pleadings, the Tribunal framed the following issues for trial:

1. Whether the accident occurred on 18. 1. 1998 was due to the rash and negligent driving of RTC bus bearing No. AP-9-Z-8724 driven by its driver ? 2. Whether the petitioner is entitled for any compensation. If so to what amount and from whom ? 3. To what relief ?

( 6 ) IN support of the case of the claimant, he got examined himself as P. W. 1 and got marked Exs. A-1 to A-6. On behalf of the respondent, the driver of the bus was examined as R. W. 1 and no document was got marked.

( 7 ) APPRECIATING the entire evidence both oral and documentary, the Tribunal held that the accident occurred due to the rash and negligent driving of the driver of the bus. With regard to compensation, taking into consideration Ex. A-3 injury certificate which shows that he suffered one grievous injury on lower 1/3rd of left leg and another on left eye brow and that as per Ex. A-6 disability certificate as he suffered 40 per cent disability and also taking into consideration the amount spent towards treatment and further as there is no evidence with regard to the income of the claimant as a private employee and taking into considering the pain and suffering undergone by him, the Tribunal awarded an amount of Rs. 1,00,000/- under all the heads. Aggrieved by the same, the Corporation filed the present appeal.

( 8 ) THE learned Standing Counsel appearing for the Corporation while disputing the cause of the accident, mainly contended that the Tribunal erred in relying on the injury certificate, disability certificate and the medical bills produced by the claimant without examining the doctor. She submitted that without examining the doctor, the injuries sustained and the extent of disability, cannot be assessed by the Tribunal and, therefore, non-examination of the doctor is fatal

Click Here to Read the rest of this document