HIGE-i CGU‘RT GF CHHATTQSGiiRH #1? EQLAgpi DiViSiON EEé‘iC-g-i QQRANE ROWELE SHRI REJEEV SUPTA. C.J. 8: HGu‘é’%LE SHR: saNiL Kh‘MAR $3 ”HA, .i .... .. .. . . . . .. .. Misc Annea§ N611 o? 2§02 gsaegami Vishnu 'Yadav. son cf Shri Chaturu wiEhlIarlk h: man a. Inn!“ uua‘v', agau (-1 nhnxd quuut 51 4 y€a§3f fesmeni of Bast Road. Ehamtari. Dis‘it Dhammri Ir‘r‘n \‘J‘Jl \_../ Eefsus Beni Prasad son of Neeikarxt Vanshdhar, aged abaut 38 years, resident of vinage Ranji, P3 Rangi, near Laxmi Market, Jabaipmr (MR) presentiy {esiding at Vikki garage} Teiibandha, Raipur (C.G. 2 Devi Singh, son oi Sukiai Patei, aged abcut 8 years, resident of Gupéeswar Wad, House No. 255, Jabaipur {MP} .w~.m.iu yicamitiy ”m; icmdnig i“... .-.+ m. \mli: vmKi ”mm... gaiagE, Resaondenis A 1A ww-appxicams i L \W 3‘ Teiibandha, Reinur {CG} 3 The New indie insurance Co. Ltd.. 4-wougu v k genior c} ivieiorrai Marrager, Zonai Offioe. ThakKar Chamber. . GE Road. Bhiiaii Drstt: Burg (6.3} Misceiianecus Anneai untier Sectien 173 of the Mater Vehicie Act .. . Present : Shri Sanjay Agrawal, oounsei forthe appeiiant. None for respondents No.1 and 2. .. . .. .. Shri $hreekumar Aorawai, $enior Counsei with Shri Anand Guota. counsei for resoondent No.3. ORDER (3m September, 291% J The foiiowing order of the Court was passed by Raéeev Gupia. C.J. Appenant Vishnu Yadav is seeking enhancement of the compensation awarded by the Additionai Motcr Accident C§aims TribunaL Sherman (for short “the Tr3§cunal‘) vide award dated 22.69.2301 passed in Claim Case No.22G/2GOG. 2) As against the compensation of Rs.10§(),500/-, ciaimed by the appellant/ciaimant, by filing a ciaim petition under Section i66 of the Motor Vehicies Act. for the iniuries sustained by him in the motor accident on 06.34.20GG, the Triounai awarded a totai sum of Rs.52,600l— as compensation aiong with interest @ 9% per annum from the date ot’ the fiiing of the ciaim petition tiii the date oi actual D&Vment. 3) The Tribunal on a ciose scrutiny of the entire evidence led before it held that claimant Vishnu Yadav sustained muitioie serious injuries in the motor accident on (36.04.2GDG; the injuries and the fractures sustained by the claimant in the motor accident resuited in permanent disabitity to the extent of ?0%; the accEdent occurred due to rash and negitgent driving ot‘ the driver of the offending vehicle Truck bearing registration NoMP—23Gi8’l36; as the above oftendino vehicle Truck on the date of theaccident was insured with the New lndia insurance Company Limited, the tnsurance Company was iiable to pay compensation to the ciaimant //’/‘/\ \ 4') As the respondents have not fiied any appe award, the above findings recorded bv the Tribunal have now attained finaliiv. 5) The Tribunai considering the number and nature of the inguries preved to have been sustained bv the ciaimant in the mate? accident and the resultant permanent disabilitv and the amcun’c proved to have been spent on treatment, awarded Rs2QOQOX— towards loss in the future earnind canaoitv; Re.15.0DO/— towards medicai expenses: attendaht and special diet; RstQGOOi- for ioss of income durind the oeriod of his treatment: RsEDGOI- towards oain and suffering: and Rs.2.000;- towards future medicai expenses. The Tribunal, thus. awarded a totai sum of RSEZDDOI— as compensation to the claimant. The Tribunal further directed payment of interest on the above amount of compensation of RsSZGGOI— @ Q% per annum from the date of the filing of the oiaim petition tltl the date of actual pavment. 6) Shri Sanjay Agrawal, learned counsel for the appeiiant submitted that the Tribunal has erred in awardino iow compensation of Rs.52,0€)0f— only, though the appellant on account of the permanent disabiiitv was rendered unfit to cursue his occupation as Eriver‘ 7} Shri $hreekumar Agrawai. learned Senior Counsel for respondent No.3 the New india insurance Company Limited on the other hand supported the award and contended that the compensation of RsSZOGGI- awarded by the ribunal is just and //f1/\ n \ " ainst the /' proper comgaensatien in the facts and circumsiances of the present CaSe. 8) laimant Vishnu Yadav on the date of" the accident was aged C about 51 years. He was driver by occupation. The evidence of AW’I Dr. VK Panciev has estabiished that the claimant sustained fracture of his rioht ieo in the motor accident. it is a matter of common knowledge that substantial amount is required to be spent on the treatment of fracture. As the ciaimant was driver by occupation and he suffered fracture of his right ieg in the motor accident he couid not have performed his duties as driver for a oeriod of at least six months. Q) The compensation of RsSZDGOI— awarded by the Tribunai when examined in the context of the above mentioned broad features of the case, in our opinion, is certainly on the tower side and deserves to be enhanced suitably. 10) Considering all the relevant aspects of the matter, we are of the opinion that further award of Rs.25,000l— inclusive of interest component would make the compensation of Rs.52,€)0f)i— awarded by the Tribunal as iust and proper compensation in the facts and circumstances of the present case. ’it) The appeai filed by the appeiianticiaimant for enhancement of the compensation, therefore, is aliowed in part. The claimant is awarded further sum of Rs.2S,GGGI— inclusive of interest component on the enhanced amount of compensation in addition to the sum of RsEZGDOi— awarded bv the Tribunal. />\J / \ /'\ // \ 12) Respondent No.3 the New india Insurance Company Limited is granted tmee months’ time for depositing the total sum of Rs.25,(3(30l'— before the concernino Cia§ms Tribunal. 13') No order as to costs. 5,” pad ma 1 Sd/— Sdl- n’ 7 2 Sunil Kumar Sinha 3 Chief Justice Judge {LL .g‘ , h V