-^<' HIGH COURT OF CHHATTESGARH AT BILASPUR DiViSIONBENCH HON'BLE SHRI RAJEEV GUPTA, CJ. HON'BLE SHR! SUNSL KUIVIAR SENHA, J. Mlsc. Appeal (Cl No. 439 of 2008 :. Nihal Ansari S/o Shri Ramjan Ansari, aged <about 23 years, R/o No. O- M/74 Vikasnagar, Kummunda, P.S. Kusmunda Tahsll-Katghora, Korba C.G. APPELLANT RESPONDENTS Versus 1. Ravi Kumar S/o Karim Bhal aged 28 years, through-House of Gangadhar Kundu, Gevra Basti, Kusmunda, P.S. Kusmunda, Distt. Korba C.G. 2. Gangadhar Kundu S/o Amulya Kundu, Address - Gevra Basti, P.S. Kusmunda, Distt. Korba C.G. 3. The Oriental insurance Company Ltd. Branch Office - Korba, Distt. - Korba (C.G.) Vehlcles Act.1988 Present: Shri IVi.K. Baeg, learned counse! for the appellant. ORDER (01st ofAprll, 2008) The fo!!owlng order of the Court was passed by Rajeev Gupta, C.J. ,. Shri iVI.K. Baeg, iearned counsel for the appellant is heard on admlssion. ^- 2. Appeiiant - NihaJ Ansari, is seeking enhancement of the compensatlon awarded by the Additionai Motor Accldent Claims Tribunal, Katghora, Distt. - Korba C.G., (for short "The Tribunal), vide award dated 26-12-2007, passed in Clalm Case No.211/2007. 3. Appellant / Ctalmant - Nihal Ansari, daimed compensation of Rs.42,90,100/- by filing a claim petition under Section 166 of the IViotor Vehicies Act (for short 'the Act') for the injuries sustained by him in the motor accident on 02-05-2004, when his scooter was dashed by the offending vehicie - jeep bearing Registration No. CG/12/ZD/2712, resulting in multipie serious injuries to the claimant. The daimant further pleaded that he spsnt substantlal amount on hls treatment and on account of the injuries and the fracturss sustained by him in the motor accident, he has been rendered unfit to pursue his occupation as Computer Teacher. 4. The Tribunal on a close scrutlny of the evidence led by the partles held that claimant - Nihal Ansari sustained injuries includlng fractures of his right teg and parietal bone in the motor accident on 02-05-2004; the accident occurred due to rash and negiigent driving of the driver of the offending vehicle - jeep; the injuries and the fractures sustained by the claimant in the motor accident resuited in the permanent disability to the extent of 11 %; and ,as the offending vehicle - jeep was insured on the date of the acddent with the Orientai Insurance Company Limited, the ^ 'i!:C t insurance Company was liable to pay compensation to the cEalmant. 5. The Tribuna! consldering the amount proved to have been spent by the ciaimant on his treatment and the period during which he remalned hospitaiized, awarded Rs.70,929/- towards medlcal expensss; Rs.1,02,000/-towards loss of future income; Rs.10,000/- towards paln and suffering; Rs.5,000/- towards speciai diet and Rs.2,000/- for ioss of amenities of life and thus awarded a totai sum of Rs.1,89,929/- as compensation to the claimant for the Injuries sustained by him in the motor accident a!ong with interest @8% per annum frorn the date of flling of the claim petition tili the date of actual payment. 6. Shri M.K. Baeg, iearned counse! for the appellant vehernentiy argued thst the Tribuna! has erred in awarding low compensation of Rs.1,89,929/" only though the ciaimant suffered serious Injuries and fractures in the motor accident. 7. Appeiiant -~ Nihai Ansari, was working as Computer Teacher on the date of the accldent. During the course of hearing, ShrEM.K. Baeg Eearned counsel for the appellant frankly conceded that the appeiiant is contlnuing in the same job and his saiary too has not been reduced by his empioyer on account of injuries and fracture sustained by the appeliant in the motor accident. Thus, it is apparent that the injuries and fractures resuitlng in permanent disability to the extent of 11 % have not in any manner adverseiy affected the earning capacity of the (5? appeSiant. The Tribunal, inspite of the above fact, has been qulte liberal in av^arding a substantial amount of Rs.1,02,000/- towards loss of future Income to the appeliant/ clalmant. The appeilant couid establish the medicai expenses to the extent of Rs.70,929/- snd the Tribunai has awarded the same amount to the clalmant. 8. On due consideration, we do not find any scope for enhancement ofthe compensation awarded by the Tribuna!. 9. The appeal, therefore, is iiab!e to be dismissed and is hereby dlsmissed summarijy. Sd/- Chief Justice subbu Sd/- Sunil Kumar Sinha Judge '<....-