HIGHCOURT OF CHHATTISGARH ATBILASPUR DIVISION BENCH CORAM: HON'BLE SHRI RAJEEV GUPTA, C.J. & HON'BLE SHRI RANGNATH CHANDRAKAR, J. Misc. Appeal (0 No. 260 of 2010 c w^ Appellant : Picchadu Ram, s/o Tingali Ram, Claimant aged about 45 years, caste Dhobi, r/o • village : Kurudih, at present address Imliduggu, ward No.5, near Ashirwad Bhawan, Korba, district Korba C.G. VERSUS Respondents 1 Vikram Kodwar s/o Ram Lakhan Kodwar, aged about 38 years, caste Dahiya, r/o village Dhanpuri, district Sahdol, M.P. at present r/o village Gumghar Dharamkanta, Naresh Kumar & Company Private Limited, near C.M.D. College, Link Road, district Bilaspur C.G. (Driver of offending vehicle) 2 M/s Naresh Kumar & Company Private Limited, through Branch Manager, B.K. Sur, s/o late H.L. Sur, aged about 45 years, r/o near C.M.D. College, Link Road, district Bilaspur C.G. (Registered owner of offending vehicle) \ . ; . 3 I.C.I.C.I. Lombard General Insurance Company Limited, I.C.I.C.I. Manager, I.C.I.C.I. Lombard General Insurance Company Limited, B.R. Plaza, 2nd Floor, Link Road, Bilaspur, tahsil & district Bilaspur C.G. (Insurer of offending vehicle) Misc. Appeal under Section 173 ofthe IVIotor Vehicle Act. Present: Shri P.K. Patel, counsel for the appellant. Shri Amit Kumar, counsel for respondents No.1 &2. ShriAmrito Das, counsel for respondent No.3. \ .slf^^•SBte^'11. MACNo. 260 of 2010 ORDER ith (24mAugust,2011) The following order of the Couri: was passed by Rajeev Gupta, C.J. AppellanV claimant Pichhadu Ram is seeking enhancement of the compensation awarded by the Second Additional Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Korba (for short 'the Tribunal') vide award dated 19.02.2010, passed in Claim Case No.136/2008. 2) As against the compensation of Rs.16,40,OOO/- claimed by the appellant/claimant, by filing aclaim petition under Section 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act, for the injuries sustained by him in the motor accident on 03.09.2008, the Tribunal awarded a total sum of Rs.25,000/- as compensation along with interest @ 7% per annum from the date of filing of the claim petition till the date of actual payment. 3) The Tribunal on a close scrutiny of the entire evidence led before it held the I.C.I.C.I. Lombard General Insurance Company Limited, the insurer of the offending vehicle Truck/ Capsule bearing registration No.C.G.04J-0408, liable to pay compensation to the claimant. 4) As the insurer of the above offending vehicle Truck/ Capsule has not filed any appeal challenging the above finding recorded bythe Tribunal, the same nowhas attained finality. ^ iif< •• MACNo. 260 of 2010 5) 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 spent on treatment, awarded lump-sum of Rs.25,000/- as compensation to the 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.25,000/- @ 7% per annum from the date of filing of the claim petition till the date of actual payment. 6) Shri P.K. Patel, learned counsel for the appellant submitted that the Tribunal has erred in awarding low compensation of Rs.25,000/- only though the appellanV claimant sustained multiple serious injuries including fracture in the motor accident. 7) Shri Amrito Das, learned counsel for respondent No.3, I.C.I.C.I. Lombard General Insurance Company Limited, the insurer of the offending vehicle Truck/ Capsule, 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 Amit Kumar, learned counsel for respondents ' No.1 and 2, the driver and owner of the offending vehicle Truck/ Capsule, also supported the award. 9) Claimant Pichhadu Ram was aged about 45 years o.n the date of the accident. He was a labour by occupation. The claimant sustained multiple serious injuries including fracture of his left hand is established from the evidence of AW3 X-—•- MACNo.260of2010 z^ <,-. lri^~ Dr. Thawait. It is a matter of common knowledge that substantial amount is required to be spent on the treatment of fracture. The claimant, being a labour, could not have performed his duties as labour on account of the fracture of his left hand for a period of 3-4 months, resulting in monitory loss to him. 10) The compensation of Rs.25,000/- awarded by the Tribunal when examined in thecontext of the above mentioned broad features of the case, inour opinion, is somewhat on the lower side and deserves to be enhanced to some extent. 11) Considering all the relevant aspects of the matter, we are of the opinion that further award of Rs.11,000/- inclusive of interest component on the enhanced amount of compensation would make the compensation of Rs.25,000/- awarded by the Tribunal as just and proper compensation in the facts and circumstances of the present case. 12) The appeal filed by the appellant/ claimant for enhancement ofthe compensation, therefore, is allowed in part. The claimant is awarded further sum of Rs.11,000/- inclusive of intferest component on the enhanced amount of compensation in addition to the sum of Rs.25,000/- awarded by the Tribunal. 13) -Respondent No.3 I.C.I.C.I. Lombard General Insurance Company Limited is granted three months'time for depositing the total sum of Rs.11,000/- before the concerning Claims Tribunal. 14) No order as to costs. Sd/- Chief Justice ••Sd/-..'' R.N.Charidrakar Judge ;;i£;S;^s-! i'^^3KS