., v u HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR DIVISION BENCH CORAM: HON’BLE SHRI RAJEEV GUPTA, C.J. & HON’BLE SHRI N.K. AGARWAL, J. Misc. Appeal No.369 of 2004 Appellant] Claimant Ku Asha Singh, D/o Radheshyam Singh, aged about 3O years, Occupation — Student, r/o SECL Colony, Baikunthpur, District Koriya, CG VERSUS Respondents 1. South Eastern Coal fields Limited, Non-Applicants Seepat Road, Bilaspur, through Chief General Manager, SECL, Baikunthpur Area, Distt Koriya, CG Depot Manager, Regional Stores, Charcha Colliery, Baikunthpur Area, Tehsil Baikunthpur, District Koriya, CG 3. Ramkripal, s/o Anandram aged about 45 years, Occup‘ation — Driver, r/o General Manager’s Ofhce, Baikunthpur Area, District Koriya, CG Branch Manager, United Insurance Company Limited, Branch Near Ram Mandir, Ambikapur, District Surguja, CG Memo of appeal under Section 173 of the‘Motor Vehicles Act. Present : Shri AK Prasad, counsel for the appeliant. Shri HB Agrawal, Senior Counsel with §mt Meera Jaiswal, counsel for respondents No.1 and 2. Shri Sanjay Gupta, counsel on behalf of Shri Dashrath Gupta, counsel for respondent No.4. ORDER (13m June, 2011) The following order of the Court was passed by Rajeev Gupta, C.J. Appellant/claimant Ku. Asha Singh is seeking enhancement of the compensation awarded by the Additional Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Baikunthpur, District Koriya (for short ‘the Tribunal’) vide award dated 24.12.2003, passed in Claim Case No.22/2002. 2) As against the compensation of Rs.5,32,674/: claimed by the appellant/ claimant by filing a ciaim petition under Section 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act, for the injuries sustained by her in the motor accident on 13.08.2000, the Tribunal awarded a total sum of Rs.25,000/— as compensation along with interest @ 9% per annum r from the date of tiling of the claim petition till the date of actual payment. 3) The Tribunal ona close scrutiny of the entire evidence led before it held that the claimant sustained injuries in the motor accident on 13.08.2000; the accident occurred due to rash and 7 negligent driving of the. driver of the offending vehicle jeep bearing registration No.MP 27-D/2523; as the above offending vehicle jeep on the date of the accident was insured with the United India Insurance Company Limited and the Insurance Company could not establish any breach of the policy conditions, the Insurance Company was liable to pay compensation to the claimant. // \ x 4) As the respondents have not filed any appeal against the award, the above findings recorded by the Tribunal have now attained finality. 5) The Tribunai considering the number and nature of the injuries proved to have been sustained by the claimant in the motor accident, awarded lump—sum of Rs.25,000/- towards general damages and medical expenses. The Tribunal further directed payment of interest on the above amount of compensation of Rs.25,000/— @ 9% per annum from the date of filing of the claim petition till the date of actual payment. 6) Shri AK Prasad, learned counsel for the appellant vehemently argued that the Tribunal has erred in awarding low compensation of Rs.25,000/— only, though the appellant/claimant sustained multiple serious injuries in the motor accident. 7) Shri Sanjay Gupta,‘learned counsel appearing on behalf of Shri Dashrath Gupta, learned counsel for respondent No.4, the United India insurance Company Limited, the insurer of the offending vehicle jeep on the other hand, supported the award and contended that the compensation of Rs.25,000/— awarded by the Tribunal is just and proper compensation in the ‘facts and circumstances of the present case. 8) Shri HB Agrawal, learned Senior Counsel with‘ Ms Meera Jaiswal, learned counsel for respondents No.1 and 2 the owner of the offending vehicle jeep also supported the award. i l .v A 4 9) Cla’imant Ku Ashla Singh was aged about 20 years on the date of the accident. She was a college going student. Admittedly, she was not an earning member on the date of the accident. lt has come in the evidence that the entire medical expenses were borne i by the South Eastern Coalfields Limited, the employer of claimant’s father Radheshyam Singh. Neither any disability certificate was produced nor any doctor was examined before the Tribunal to establish that the injuries said to have been sustained by the claimant in the motor accident resulted in any permanent disability. The only doctor examined in the case before the Tribunal i.e.AW/3 Dr RC Sharma is almost a stranger to the case as admittedly he neither treated the claimant nor has issued any disability certificate in the case. 10) The compensation of Rs.25,000/— awarded by the Tribunal when examined in the context of the above mentioned broad features of the case, we are satisfied, is just and proper compensation in the facts and circumstances of thepresent case and does not call for any enhancement in this appeal. 11) For the foregoing reasons, the appeal filed by the appellantl claimant for enhancement of the compensation is liable- to be dismissed and is hereby dismissed. 12) No order as to costs. / Sd/— ' Chief Justice subbu