J/ El RAJEEV GUPTA, C.J. & HON'BLE S Clalmant Ashok Kumar Patel aged about 18 years S/o Samaru Patel R/o Vili. Lophandi, P.S. Koni Tahsll and district Bilaspur C.G. 3 Raju Ram s/o Samuram R/o Vil!. Lophandi, P.S. Koni Tahsi! and District Bilaspur C.G. Balram Patet, s/o C.L. Patel, R/o. vill. Lophandi, P.S. Koni Tahsil and District Bilaspur C.G. United India Insurance Company Limited through Branch Manager, Branch Office, Rajendranagar, llaspur C.G. Present: Shri Goutam efrapal, counsel for the appellant. Shri A.C. Sahu, counsei for respondents No.1 and 2. Shri H.B. Agrawai, S.enior Counsel with Shri Pankaj , Agrawat, counsel for respondent No.3. J? The fol order of the Court was passed »^\ ' t&Sa.. i ";'*'63& j! < ^ W M ^:-y Appellant - Ashok Kumar Patel is seeking enhancement of the compensation awarded by the Additional Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Bilaspur (for short 'the Tribunal') vide award dated 17.10.2005, passed in Claim Case No.07/2005. 2) As aaainst the compensation of Rs.5,20,000/- claimed by the appellant/claimant by filing a claim petition under Section 163-A of the Motor Vehicles Act for the injuries sustained by him in the motor accident on 21.11 .2004, the -Tribuna! awarded a total sum of Rs.1,60,000./- as compensation along wjth interest @ 6% per annum from the date of flling of the claim petition tili the date of actual payment. 3) The Tribunal on a close scrutinv of the entire evidence led before it held that claimant Ashok Kumar Patel sustained injuries in the motor accldent on 21.11.2004; the iniuries and fractures sustained by the claimant in the motor accident resulted in amputation of his left !ea below knee: the accident occurred due to rash and negligent driving of the driver of the offending vehicte Tractor-Trolley bearing registration No. C.G.10A/6501 and C.G.10A/6497, respectively; as the above offending vehide Tractor-Trolley 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 c-1aimant. . '/ 77 K- ./' .v V»S2S-<S-»'' 4) As the respondents have not ffied any appeal against the award, the above findings recorded by the Tribunal have now attained finatity. 5) The Tribuna! 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 his treatment, awarded Rs.1,44,000/- towards loss of future earning capacity; Rs.10,000/- towards pain and suffering; Rs.6,000/- towards medial expenses. The Tribunal, thus, awarded a total sum of Rs..1,60,000/- as compensation to thfe 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.1,60,000/- @ 6% per annum from the date of filing of the claim petition till the date of actual payment. 6) Shri Goutam Khetrapal, learned counsel for ths appellant submitted that the Tribunal has erred in not awarding any sum towards loss of income during the period of treatment and towards special diet and attendant; and in awarding low compensation of Rs.1,60,000/- only. 7) Shri H.B. Agrawal, learned Senior Counsel with Shri Pankaj Agrawa!, iearned counsel for respondent No.3 the United India insurance Company Limited, on the other hand;supported the award and contended that the compensation of Rs.1,60,000/- awarded by the Tribunal is just and proper compensation in the facts and circumstances of the present case_ '/ 7 •••'^•^ •''••^'^^•^. iJs ^< 8) Shri A.C. Sahu, learned counsel for respondents No. 1 & 2 also supported the award. 9) Claimant Ashok Kumar Patel was aged about 18 years on the date of the accident. He was a labour by occupation and at the time of the accident he was travellina in the Tractor-Trolley as a labour. The claimant sustained multiple serious injuries in the motor accident leading to amputation of his left leg below knee has been found proved by the Tribunal.- It is a matter of common knowledge that substantial amount is requiredto be spent on the treatment of fractures. The claimant on' account of the amputation of his left ieg below knee would suffer mentally and physically for whole of his life. The claimant on account of the injuries and fractures sustained in the motor accident could not have worked as labour for a period of about 4-6 months, resulting in monitory loss to him. The Tribunal certainly has fallen into error in not awarding any sum towards loss of income during the period oftreatment and towardsspeciat diet and attendant. 10) Considering aii the relevant aspects of the matter, we are of the opinion that further award of Rs.25,000/- inclusive of interest co.mponent on the enhanced amount of compensation would make the compensation of Rs.1,60,000/- awarded by the Tribunal as just and proper compensation in the facts and circumstances of the present case. 11) The appeal filed by the appellant/ claimant for enhancement of the comDensation, therefore, is ailowed in part. The claimant is awarded further sum of Rs.25,000/- inciusive of interest component on the enhanced amount ofcompensation in addition to the sum of Rs.1,60,000/- awarded by the Tribunal. 12) Respondent No.3 the' United India Insurance Company Limited is aranted three months' time for depositina the total sum of Rs.25.000/- before the concernina Claims Tribunal. 13) No order as to costs. Sd/- Chief Justice Sd/- Rangnath Chandrakar Judge subbu