HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR SINGLE BENCH: HON'BLE SHRI R. L. JHANWAR, J. Misc. Appeal (0 No. 50^2009 APPELLANT Devkumar Patel. Versus RESPONDENTS : Adil Khan and others. ORDER Post for pronouxicement on ^ \ August, 2010 JUDGE <T)\__/8/2010 •< ^^-a»fc^ HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH : BILASPUR SINGLE BENCH: HON'BLE SHRI R.L.JHANWAR. J. Misc. Appeal (C) No. 501 of2009 APPELLANT RESPONDENTS Devkumar Patel, aged about 40 years, S/o Shri Ramadhin Patel, R/o Village Potiyadeeh, Tahsil and District Dhamtari (C.G.) VERSUS 1. Adil Khan, S/o Sultan Beg, aged about 25 years, R/o Adhari Navagaon Dhamtari, Tahsil and District Dhamtari (C.G.) 2. M/s Anil Rice Mill, Proprietor Anil Agrawal, S/o Ramlal, aged about 40 years, Industrial ward Dhamtari, Tahsil and District Dhamtari (C.G.) 3. Branch Manager, The New India Insurance Company Limited, Branch Office, llnd Floor, R.D.A. Building, Raipur, District Raipur (C.G.) MISCELLANEOUS APPEAL UNDER SECTION 173 OF THE MOTOR VEHICLESACT.1988 Appearance: Shri P.P. Sahu and Shri Aditya Kumar, counsel forthe appellant. None for respondents No.1 & 2. Shri Deepak Gupta, counsel for respondent No.3. ORDER (Passedon ^>\ .08.2010) Appellant Devkumar Patel is seeking enhancement of compensation awarded by the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Dhamtari (for short (the Tribunal') vide award dated 05 January, 2009 in claim case No. 137/2007. 2. As against the compensation of Rs. 11,08,0007- claimed by the appellant/claimant by filing a claim petition under Section 166 ofthe Motor Vehicles Act for the injuries sustained by him in the motor accident on 3.7.2007, the Tribunal awarded a total sum of Rs.59,500/- as '^^ z- compensation and after reducing 25% from the awarded amount, the Tribunal has only awarded 75% amount from the awarded compensation to the appellant on the grdund that there is contributory negligence on the part of the appellant. The Tribunal further ordered the respondents No.2 and 3, jointly and severally, to pay 75% of awarded amount i.e. Rs.44,625.00 to the appellant with interest at 6% per annum from the date of filing of claim petition till the actual payment. 3. The Tribunal on close scrutiny of the evidence led beforeit, held that Devkumar sustained injuries in the motor accident on 3.7.2007; the accident occurred due to rash and negligent driving of driver of Matador bearing No.C.G.05 C/9324; as the above Matador on the date of accident was insured with the New India Insurance Company Limited - Respondent No.3, the insurance company was liable to pay compensation to the claimant. The Tribunal while finding that there was contributory negligence on the part of the appellant also awarded 75% of the awarded amount i.e. Rs.44,625/- to the appellant after reducing Rs.14,875/- out of the total awarded compensation, along with 6% interest per annum. As against this, the respondents have not filed any appeal. 4. 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 the treatment awarded Rs.24,500/- towards medical expenses, Rs.4000/- towards special diet and other expenses, Rs.4000/- towards pain and suffering, Rs.3000/- towards loss of income for two months and Rs.24,000/- towards loss of future income. In this manner, the Tribunal awarded a total compensation of Rs.59,500/-. Out of the awarded total compensation, the Tribunal awarded a sum of Rs.44,625/- after reducing 25% of the total compensation. Thus, the Tribunal entitled the appellant to receive Rs.44,625/-. The Tribunal fastening the liability to pay Rs.44,625/- on respondents No.2 & 3 jointly and severally awarded interest @ 6% per annum on Rs.44,625/-. 5 . Learned counsel for the appellant / claimant submitted that the Tribunal has erred in awarding low compensation of Rs.44,625/- only; has erred in arriving at a conclusion that there was contributory negligence on the part of the appellant whereas it ought to have held that the driver of .?F^ .1 :-v"r' J s -^ -^' s the offending vehicle was only responsible for the accident and not the claimant, who was a pedestrian. He further argued that learned Tribunal has also erred in assessing the income of claimant at Rs.1500/- per month whereas it should have been fixed at Rs.3000/- asnotional income. 6. On the other hand, learned counsel for insurance company opposed the appeal and argued that the compensation awarded by the Tribunal is just and proper compensation, and therefore, need not be interfered with. 7. The appellant - Devkumar was aged about 40 years on the date of accident. He was working as Tailor. As there is no definite evidence regarding his income prior to the accident and thereafter, it is difficult to hold with any amount of certainty that he suffered loss of future earning capacity. Nevertheless, it has come in the evidence that there was 20% disability suffered by the appellant, as stated by Dr. Amit Agrawal A.W.2. The learned Tribunal has erred in disbelieving the disability certificate granted to the appellant on the ground that the appellant produced two medical certificates, one by District Medical Board in which 40% disability of the appellant was shown and another showing 20% disability suffered by the appellant. For first certificate, the appellant has led no evidence and in second one 20% disability was shown. The appellant obtained the said certificate from Dr. Amit Agrawal A.W.1. According to him, the appellant suffered 20% disability which shows that the disability of the appellantwas reduced. 8. Therefore, the compensation of Rs.44,625/- awarded by the Tribunal when examined in the context of the above mentioned broad features of the case, in my opinion, is somewhat on the lower side and deserves to be enhanced. 9. Cohsidering all the relevant factors including the nature of injuries sustained by the claimant in the motor accident; the monitory loss the claimant suffered due to disability, 1 am of the opinion that further award of Rs.31,000/- inclusive of interest component on the enhanced amount of compensation will make the compensation of Rs.59,500/- awarded by the Tribunal as just and proper compensation in the facts and circumstances ofthe presentcase. /^.fe :^i -""' J^ -^>! (^0} 10. The appeal filed by the appellant / claimant for enhancement of the compensation, therefore, is allowed in part. The appellant / claimant is awarded further sum of Rs.31,000/- inclusive of interest component on the enhanced amount of compensation, in addition to the sum of Rs.59,500/- awarded by the Tribunal. 11. Respondent No.3 - The New India Insurance Company Limited is granted three months time for depositing the total sum of Rs.31,000/- before the concerning Claims Tribunal. No order as to costs. Sd/- R.L. Jhanwar Judge