^A HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR DIVISION BENCH CORAM: HON'BLE SHRI RAJEEV GUPTA, CJ. HON'BLE SHRI RANGNATH CHANDRAKAR, J Misc Appeal (Cl No.1466 of 2009 Appellants Claimant before the Tribunal ^i Respondents 1 Non - clajmants before the Tribunal Hemant @ Hem Kumar Sahu, aged about 36 years, s/o Kashi Ram Sahu, R/o Vjllage Bichhibahara, Post Kokha, Police Station and Tehsil Gurur Distt Durg (CG) VERSUS Chandra Prakash Gupta, s/o Dinesh Kumar Gupta, aged about 21 years, r/o Risajpara, Dhamtari, Tahsil & Distt Dhamtri (CG) (Driver of Bolero No.CG 05/B-4170) Piyush Kumar Rathore, s/o Rashmikant Rathore aged about 30 years, r/o Maitri Vihar Colony, Dhamtari, Tahsil & Distt Dhamtari (CG) (Registered owner of Bolero No.CG 05/B-4170) The Oriental Insurance Company Limited, registered and Head Office, Ashif Ali Road, New Delhj, Through - Branch Manager, Branch Office, OP Adarsha Bal Mandir, Main Road, Dhamtari, Tahsil & Distt Dhamtari (CG) And Divisional Manager, Divisional Office, Malviya Nagar, Durg, Tahsil &Distt Durg (CG) Insurance Policy No.2007/07991, Office code No.152307 agent code No.251, valid from 07.02.2007 to 06.02.2008 (Insurer of Bolero No.CG 05/B-4170) Madan Lal Sinha, s/o Bhagwan Ram Sinha, r/o VJIIage Tengna Barpara, Post ^o. ^ Sonaidongari, Police Station and Tahsil Gurur, Distt Durg (CG) (Driver of Maruti Van No.CG-OS/ZD-0446) Keshav Kumar Katendra, S/o Uttam Singh Katendra, aged about 33 years, r/o village Mokha, Police Station and Tahsil Gurur Distt Durg (CG) (Registered owner of Maruti Van No.CG-OS/ZD-0446) 1 -^ Miscellaneous Appeal under Section 173 of Motor Vehicles Act Present : Shri NK Chatterjee, counsel for the appellant. Shri SP Sahu, counsel for respondent No.2. Shri HP Agrawal, counsel for respondent No.3. ORDER (26th July, 2011) The following order of the Court was passed by Rajeev Gupta, C.J. Appellant/ Ctaimant Hemant @ Hem Kumar Sahu is seeking enhancement of the compensation awarded by the Additional Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Balod, Distt Durg (for short 'the Tribunal') vide award dated 25.02.2009, passed in Claim Case No.79/2007. 2) As against the compensation of Rs.14,10,000/-, claimed by the appelJant/claimant, by filing a claim petition under Section 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act, for the injuries sustained by him in the motor accident on 29.04.2007, the Tribunal awarded a total sum of Rs.37,986/- as compensation along with interest @ 6% per annum r- ^7 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 Oriental Insurance Company Limited, the insurer of the offending vehicle Bolero bearing registration No.CG-OS-B/4170 liable to pay the compensation to the claimant. 4) As the insurer of the offending vehicle Bolero has not filed any appeal challenging the above finding recorded by the Tribunal, the same, now has attained finality. 5) The Tribunal considering the number and nature of the injuries proved to have been sustained by the claimant in the motor accident, awarded Rs.15,486/- towards medical expenses; Rs. 15.000/- for loss of income during the period of treatment; Rs.5,000/- for pain and suffering; Rs.1,000/- for special diet; Rs.1,000/- for conveyance; and Rs.500/- for attendant. The Tribunal, thus, awarded a total sum of Rs.37,896/- 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.37,896/- @ 6% per annum from the date of filing of the claim petition till the date of actual payment. 6) Shri NK Chatterjee, learned counsel for the appellant submitted that the Tribunal has erred in awarding low compensation of Rs.37,896/- only, though the appellant/claimant sustained multiple serious injuries including fractures resulting in permanent disabilityto the extent of 15%. Kl 7) Shri HP Agrawal, learned counsel for respondent No.3 the Oriental Insurance Company Limited, the insurer of the offending vehicle Bolero, on the other hand supported the award and contended that the compensation of Rs.37,896/- awarded by the Tribunal is just and proper compensation in the facts and circumstances of the present case. 8) Shri SP Sahu, learned counsel for respondent No.2 Piyush Kumar Rathore, the owner of the offending vehicle Bolero also supported the award. 9) Claimant Hemant @ Hem Kumar Sahu was aged about 36 years on the date of the accident. He was a Mason by occupation. The claimant sustained multiple serious injuries including fractures is established from the evidence of AW2 Dr. Akhilesh Yadav. It is a matter of common knowledge that substantial amount is required to be spent on the treatment of fractures. The claimant, being a Mason could not have performed his duties as Mason on account of the fractures sustained by him in the motor accident, at least for a period of 4 to 6 months resulting in monitory loss to him. The Tribunal certainly has erred in awarding only Rs.500/-; Rs.1,000/-; and Rs.1,000/- towards attendant, special diet and conveyance. 10) The compensation of Rs.37,896/- awarded by the Tribunal, when examined in the context of the above mentioned broad features of the case, in our opinion, is certainly oh the lower side and deserves to be enhanced to some extent. . 5 ^a^ 11) Considering all the relevant aspects of the matter, we are of the opinion that further award of Rs.20,000/- inclusive of interest component on the enhanced amount of compensation would make the compensation of Rs.37,986/- awarded by the Tribunal as just and proper compensation in the facts and circumstances of the present case. 12) The appeal filed by theappellant/claimant for enhancement of the compensation, therefore, is allowed in part. The claimant is awarded further sum of Rs.20,000/- inclusive of interest component on the enhanced amount of compensation in addition to the sum of Rs.37,986/- awarded by the Tribunal. 13) Respondent No.3 the Oriental Insurance Company Limited is granted three months' time for depositing the total sum of Rs.20,000/- before the concerning Claims Tribunal. 14) No order as to costs. Sd/- Chief Justice Sd/- R.N. Chandrakar Judge subbu4