BATHULA VENKATA RAMANA Vs. APSRTC

JUDGEMENT

(1.) CHALLENGE in this appeal is Award in MVOP No. 779 of 2000 passed by MACT -cum -I Additional District Judge, Cuddapah (for short the Tribunal). The appellant is the claimant questioning the quantum of compensation as inadequate and grossly low.

(2.) THE factual matrix of the case is thus:

(3.) CRITICISING the compensation as too low and unjust, learned counsel for the appellant firstly argued that the claimant suffered fracture of his right Tibia and Fibula at a very tender age and suffered consequent disability but the Tribunal granted only a meager amount of Rs. 5,000/ - towards pain and suffering and it needs to be enhanced.