,/c^'""^ /'/ /' '" v .??; A /^'^. i Slrf^l! 1 '^^' JJ •^ HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR DIVISION BENCH CORAM: HON'BLE SHRI RAJEEV GUPTA, C.J. & HON'BLE SHRI N.K. AGARWAL, J. Appellant Applicant Misc. Appeal No. 1253 of 2004 Krishna Kumar Singh, son of late Shri Mundrika Singh, aged about 46, resident of behind Petrol Pump, nerar Shankar Mandir, Hatkachora, Jagdalpur, district Bastar C.G. VERSUS Respondents Non-applicants Ganesh Verma, son of Shri Gulabchand Verma, aged about 29 years, resident of Indira Awas Tokapal, district Bastar. The Branch Manager, the Oriental Insurance Company, Jagdalpur, district Bastar. Memo Qfappeal under Section 173 ofthe MotorVehicIes Act. Present: Shri Sameer Uraon, counsel for the appellant. Shri Subhash Yadav, counsel for respondent No.1. Shri Ajay Mishra, counsel for respondent No.2. ORDER (01st July, 2011) The following order of the Court was passed by Rajeev Gupta, C.J. Appellant/claimant Krishna Kumar Singh is seeking enhancement of the compensation awarded by the 4th Additional Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Jagdalpur (for short 'the Tribunal') vide award dated 03.09.2004, passed in Claim Case No.36/2004. .--•^^ ^ '^" 'w '^ -^' !%:1'".^; •r ^^ 2) As against the compensation of Rs.4,42,975/- claimed by the appellanVclaimant by filinga claim petition under Section 166 ofthe Motor Vehicles Act for the injuries sustained by him in the motor accident on 11.10.2002, the Tribunal awarded a total sum of Rs.45,500/- as compensation to the claimant along with interest @ 9% per annum from the date of filing of the claim petition till the date of actual payment. 3) The Tribunal on a close scrutiny of the entire evidence led before it held the insurer of the motorcycle on which the claimant was travelling as pillion-rider liable to pay compensation to the claimant. The Tribunal considering the number and nature of the injuries proved to have been sustained by the claimant in the motor accident and the amount proved to have been spent on treatment awarded Rs.30,000/- towards medical expenses; Rs.10,000/- for pain and suffering; Rs.2,000/- for conveyance; Rs.2,000/- for attendant; and Rs.1,500/- for special diet. The Tribunal, thus, awarded a total sum of Rs.45,500/- as compensation to the claimant for the injuries sustained by him in the motor accident. The Tribunal further directed payment of interest on the above amount of compensation of Rs.45,500/- @ 9% per annum from the date of filing of the claim petition till the date of actual payment. 4) Shri Sameer Uraon, learned counsel for the appellant vehemently argued that the Tribunal has erred in awarding low compensation of Rs.45,500/- only though the claimant sustained multiple serious injuries in the motor accident. ^. 5) Shri Ajay Mishra, learned counsel for respondent No.2 the Oriental Insurance Company Limited, insurerof the motorcycle, on the other hand, contended that in fact the Insurance Company was not liable to paycompensation to the claimant as the risk of the pillion-rider was notcovered by paying extra-premium by the owner of the motorcycle. 6) Shri Subhash Yadav, learned counsel for respondent No.1 Ganesh Verma, the owner of the motorcyde on the other hand supported the award. 7) Claimant Krishna Kumar Singh was aged about 46 years on the date of the accident. He was working as Constable in the Police Force. In all probability, the medical expenses incurred by him must have been reimbursed by his employer, State Government. It is npt the case of the claimant that on account of the injuries sustained by him in the motor accident he has either been removed from the service or his salary has been reduced. As such, the injury sustained by him in the motor accident has not at all adversely affected his future earning capadty. 8) The compensation of Rs.45,500/- awarded by the Tribunal when examined in the context of the above mentioned broad features of the case, in our opinion, is just and proper compensation in the facts and circumstances of the present case and does not call for any enhancement in this appeal. 9) As we do not find any scope for enhancement of the compensation awarded by the Tribunal, the appeal filed by the appellanV claimant for enhancement of thecompensation is liable to be dismissed and is hereby dismissed. 10) No order asto costs. l| Sd/- Chief Justice Sd/- N. K. Agarwal Judge nlmmi r. '^^-