L^.^ ..;-^^^^, HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR SB: Hon'ble Shri Justice R. L. Jhanwar, M.A.(ClNo.427of2010 APPELLANT RESPONDENTS Minor Ramkumar Versus Rakesh and others. ORDER For PronounGementpf Order l-7.01.2011 Sd/- R.L. Jhanwar Judge H16H COURT OF CHHATTISGARH : BILASPUR SINGLE BENCH: HON'BLE SHRI R.L.JHANWAR, J. Misc. Appeal (Cl No.427 of 2010 APPELLANT Claimant RESPONDENTS Minor Ramkumar Son of Garib Das, aged about 16 years, through his natural guardian Father Garib Das, resident of Village Bhajidongri, Police Station Salhewara, District Rajnandgaon (C.G.) VERSUS 1. Rakesh, Son of Mannu Verma, Resident of Devpurghat, Police Station Salhewara, District Rajnandgaon (C.G.) (Driver of Vehicle) 2. Kamlesh Kumar Janghel, Son ofVidesh Ram Janghel, Resident of Viltage Salhewara, Police Station Salhewara, District Rajnandgaon (C.G.) (Owner of vehicle) 3. National Insurance Company Limited, Branch Office, Kamthi Line, Rajnandgaon (C.G.) ' (Insurer) APPEAL UNDER SECTION 173 OF THE MOTOR VEHICLES ACT. 1988 Appearance: ! Shri Abhishek Sharma, counsel for the appellant/claimant. NoneforrespondentsNo.1&2. ; Shri Sri KumarAgrawal, SeniorAdvocatewith Shri Anand Gupta. -1- ORDER (Passedon ^.01.2011) , ; n^ This is claimant's appeal. Not being satisfied by the amount of compensation of Rs.9,000/- awarded by the Additional MotorAccidents Claims Tribunal, Bairagarh, in Claim case No.37/2008, the claimant preferred this instant appeal for enhancement of amount of compensation. 2. As against the compensation of Rs.2,40,000/- claimed by the claimant by filing claim petition under Section 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act (for short 'the Act') for injuries sustained by him in the motor accident on 23.11.2007, the Tribunal, on close scrutiny of the evidence and :^"^ Wi^ 1 • Ite^ 1 <'^-1.1 ^; " ^ ..^' ^ submissions made before it, held that due to rash and negligent driving of TATA Sumo bearing No. 04 B 1838 (for short 'TATA Sumo') by its driver, the claimant sustained injuries on his legs in such motor accident and awarded a sum of Rs.9,000/- with interest at 6% per annum from the date of filing of claim petition till realization. The Tribunal further directed the respondents to pay the compensation jointly and severally. It is this order, which is under challenge by the appellanVclaimant for enhancement. 3. Learned counsel for the appellant fairly submitted at the outset that under Section 140 of the Act, amount of compensation of Rs.25,000/- on the principles of no fault liability has been paid to the appellant and after the impugned order awarding only Rs.9000/- as total compensation was passed, execution of recovery of remaining amount has been initiated against him. He argued that the total compensation of Rs.9000/- dwarded by the Tribunal is on lower side whereas under no fault liabiiity, the Tribunal should have awarded minimum Rs.25,000/-. The Tribunal should have also considered the medical bills, by virtue of which, a sum of Rs.21758.00 has been incurred on his treatment. It was further argued that ought to have considered the certificate showing 30 % permanent disability sustained by the appellant and proved by Dr.Prakash Bhalerao A.W.2. On these premises, it was urged that the compensation of Rs.9000/- awarded by the Tribunal be enhanced. •I : i 4. On the bther hand, learned Senior Counsel for the iihsurer argued insupportofthe impugnedjudgment. - r ; .! • . . ' . . 5. Having heard rival submissions, 1 have perused the impugned order and record of the Tribunal. The only point that arises for consideration in this appeal is whether or not the compensation awarded by the Tribunal deserves to be enhanced. Under Section 140 of the Motor VehiclesAct, 1988, by an amendment which was incorporated as early as on 14.11.1994, the amount of compensation which shall be payable on the principles of no fault liability in case of permanent disablement arising out of an accident was fixed to Rs.25,000/-. Admittedly,Rs.25,000/-was paid to the appellant underno fault liability. Admittedly, the appellant is a school going student and he sustained injuries on his legs when he was going to school, the said TATA Sumo caused the accident. It has come in the evidence that after the accident, the appellant was admitted in Hospital /r~^' ^^•i-€^ 5 w.e.f. 25.11.2007 till 29.11.2007. In support of the evidence and pleadings, the appellant also produced medical bills Ex.P.8 to Ex.P.17 which shows that a sum of Rs.21,758/- has been incurred on his treatment. Dr. Prakash Bhalerao A.W.2, after medical examination of the appellant, has deposed that the appellant sustained fractures on his legs and found stiffness in the ankle. In his opinion the appellant sustained 30% permanent disability due to injuries received in the motor accident. He proved the Ex.P.18,certificate of permanent disability, issued by the Medical Board, Rajnandgaon wherein the appellant was shown to be sustained 30% permanent disability due to injuries sustained in the motor accident. 6: Taking into con^ideration-all'the'relevantfactorsiincluding the nature of injuries sustained by the claimant in the motor accident; his hospitalization and expenses incurred during treatment, 1 am of the considered opinion that the award of Rs.9000/- by the Tribunal is on lower side and deserves to be enhanced. The Tribunal shoulcl have taken liberal, yiew tq^ adeguately ^cqmpensate the appellant^ taking intp consideration his injuries sustained in the motor accident, his hospitalization and pain and suffering arising out ofinjuries and during treatment and should have considered the fact that the steep fall in the value of money from 1994 till date and also the facts and circumstances of the present case. 1 am of the opinion that further award of Rs.25,000/- ;-...•'r .:!; ..:'.:.• ':: ... ; . ';...'..'-..;. • ;•...: 'i i.:'.., .:;..- inclusive of interest componentoh the enhanced amount of compensation will make the compensation of Rs.9,000/- awarded by the Tribunal asjust and proper compensation in the facts and circumstances of the present case. 7. Accordingly, the appeal filed by the appellant for enhancement is, therefore, allowed in part. The appellant / claimant is awarded further sum of Rs.25,000/- inclusive of interest component on the enhanced amount of compensation, in addition to the sum of Rs.9,000/- awarded: by the Tribunal. ; r^nr; »-'•»- r>.' 8. Respondent No.3 National InsuranceCompany Limited is granted three months' time for depositing the total compensation 6f Rs.34,000/- •^SW.KW-^^^^ \^ ;i?' ^ ^ before the concerned Claims Tribunal. If sum of Rs.25,000/- has already been paid, then the said amount shall be adjusted from the total compensation and the remaining compensation of Rs.9,000/- shall be deposited within given time before the concerned Claims Tribunal. Sd/- R.L. Jhanwar Judge n »-•'n 'pr- r^