HIG H COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR SB: Hon’ble Shri Justice R. L. Jhanwar, M. A. No.357 of 2004 7/ Versus Panchanan Behra and others , : O R D E R ‘ For Pronouncement of Order LY .01 .2011 3 M ’7 Sd/- /::: R.L. Jhanwar ‘*’ Judgexr 1 \ H,oi.2011 APPELLANT Ku. Maya Sharma, D/o S.K.Sharma, Claimant HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH : BILASPUR SINGLE BENCH:N HON’BLE SHRI R.L.JHANWAR gJ. Misc. Aggeal No.35? of 200g} Age 25 years, Sub—Inspector, Chhattisgarh Police Deptt.-Mahasamund (C.G.) VERSUS ’1. Panchanan Behra, S/o Somnath Behra, Age 29 years, R/o Lalmuda, Police Station-Bijepur, Distt. Bargarh, Orissa. years, C/o S.P.A. Strom Board Balangir, Orissa. RESPONDENTS ‘1‘ 2. Seetaram Meher, S/o Unknown, Age 45 glndustriesu Pvt. Ltd. Titlagarh§ Distt. 3. The Oriental Insurance Co. Ltd. Branch APPEAL UNDER SECTION 173 OF THE MOTOR VEHICLES Ag Appearance: Ms. Morisha Chhatri, counsel for the appellant. None for respondents No.1 & 2. v. - Office, Balangir, Orissa. Shri Sudhir Agrawal, counsel for respondent No.3. ORDER (Passed on 04.01.201 1) This is claimant’s appeal. Not being satisfied by the amount of compensation of Rs.26,282/- awarded by the 2'” Additional Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Mahasaund in Claim case No.14/2003, the claimant had preferred this instant appeal for enhancement of amount of 2. Brief facts, in a nutshell, are that on 06.10.2002 at 9.00 p.m. the appellant/claimant, after her duty hours, was going towards her residence situate at B.T.O., Mahasamundpg her vehicle bearing No. C.G. 04/3927. At the same time, at National Highway No. 217, one car bearing No.OR 03/A~4408 (for short the Car), being driven by its driver/ respondent No.1 compensation. in a rash and negligent manner, dashed the appellant, as a result of which the appellant got serious Injuries on her right hand Including fracture 3. Seeking compensation of Rs.71,000/— on various heads, the appellant filed a claim rpetition pleading that she ‘was admitted in Community Health Center, Mahasamund and thereafter, due to fracture on hger right hand’s wrist and finger, she was referred to Yashwant Hospital where an amount of Rs.50,000/— has been incurred towards treatment. 4. ‘ The respondents by filing their written statements denied the averments made in claim petition. 5. ‘As‘ against the compensation of Rs.71,000/— claimed by the claimant by filing claim petition under Section 166 of the Motor Accident for injuries sustained by the claimant In motor acmdent on 6 10 2002 the learned Tribunal on close scrutiny of the submISSIons made evrdence led and material placed, held that due to rash and negligent dnvmg of respondent No.1, the accident had taken place in which the appellant got serious injuries and by holding that no doubt the appellant received serious injuries in the accident occurred on 6.10.2002 accepted the bills Ex.P.12 to Ex.P.28 relating to treatment, amounting to Rs.24,282.00. By adding Rs.2000/— towards the head diet and pain and suffering, the Tribunal awarded Rs.26,282.00 “as total compensation for injuries sustained by her in the motor accident. On perusal of the impugned order, it appears that the Tribunal was liberal in awarding Rs.2000/— under the heads diet andpain suffering despite the fact that there is such evidence. =" 6. Learned counsel for the appellant argued that the Tribunal has erred in awarding meager amount of Rs.26,282/— as totalcompensation. The Tribunal has also erred in awarding meager amount of Rs.1000/— I under‘pain and suffering whereas it ought to have increased. _7. _On the other hand, learned counsel appearing for the insurance company argued that in this case doctor had not been examined and despite that the Tribunal was liberal in awarding Rs 26 282/— which is not a meager amount for the injuries sustained by the appellant 8. l have heard the arguments advanced on behalf of parties and perused the impugned order including the record ofthe Tribunal. 9. Admittedly, the claimant sustained injuries in the motor accident occurred on 06.10.2002 as is evidence from her pleadings and evidence. ln her evidence, she has deposed that after the accident she was admitted l in Community Health Center, Mahasamund and thereafter in Yashwant Hospital, Raipur. ,Though in her pleadings and evidence, the appellant has deposed that she was admitted in the above hospital, but there was no clinching evidence on record to show that she was admitted in the above hospitals nor any treating doctor was examined by her in support of her pleadings and evidence. She has further deposed that an amount of Rs.50,000/- has been incurred during her treatment but the documentary evidence thereof has not been produced. She has only produced bills ExJP.12 to Ex.P.23 relating to her treatment, amounting to Rs.24,282/- which the Tribunal had already accepted. She has also stated that Rs.2‘050/— has been incurred towards conveyance and diet but the appellant has not been able to produce any such document to show that she was taken to the Rarpur Hospital In a rented vehicle Although In the absence of any documentary evrdence the Tribunal was Justified m awardlng Rs.26,282/—. However, the Tribunal was notJustIfIed in awarding Rs.1000/— toWards pain and mental agony suffered by the appellant during hospitalization 10 Havmg considered the facts and Circumstances of the case In View of the Injuries Including fracture sustained by the claimant her‘ hospitalization and the fact that the appellant would definitely have suffered a lot of pain and mental‘agony due to injuries and fracture caused in the motor accident and also looking to the above broad features of the case, in my considered opinion, the Tribunal has erred in awarding Rs.1000/— towards pain and mental agony for the injuries sustained by. her in the motor accident. Therefore, in the interest ofjustice, a further award of Rs.4000/— under the head pain and mental agony would meet requirement of justice. 11. Therefore, the appeal filed by the appellant for enhancement is allowed in part. The compensation of Rs.26,282/— awarded to the appellant by the Tribunal is enhanced by Rs.4,000l— more, which makes the total compensation as Rs.30,282/-. 12. The Oriental Insurance Company Limited / respondent No.3 is granted 3 months time to deposit the enhanced amount of compensation of Rs 4000/— With the concerned Claims Tribunal No order as to costs e Sdl— , R.L. Jhanw“ i Jugg,/ / i -