' HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH: BILASPUR Single Bench: Hon’ble Shri Dilip Raosaheb Deshmukh, J. ‘Z/J Miscellaneous Appeai No.672 of 2002 Appellant Jogeshwari, D/o Umashankar Bisai, Aged about 4 year3, through : Her Natural Guardian, Smt. Savita‘ W/o Shri Urhashankar Bisai, Aged about 30 years, caste-Sundi, R/o Village Udiyapal Past Bakawand, Tah; Y/ Jagdalpur, Di5lt. Bastar (C.G.) Versus Respondents 1. Suresh Kumar Yadav, son of $hri Sundar Lal Yadav, Aged about 40 years, R/o Village Basiar, Tah. Jagdalpur. Peelaram Son of Mahal Singh, Aged about 27 years, Caste Dhakad, Rio Village Baniyagaon, P.S. Bhanpurl, Distt. Bastar, ((Driver) 3. United India Insurance Company Limited, through Branch Manager, Branch Oflice Jagdalpur, in front of Anupama Talkies, ’Jagdalpur, ' Dislt. Bastar (insurer) 4. Hemant Lakkad. son of Late Shri B.G. Lakkad, Aged About 38 years. Caste- Maharashtriyan, Rio Pannarapara, Jagdalpur, Distt. Bastar (Owner/Driver) The Oriental insurance Company Limited. Through : Branch Manager. Branch Office, Jagdalpur Main Road, Jagdalpur. Miscellaneous Appeal under Section 173 of the Motor Vehicles Act Present: Shri P.P.Sahu, counsel for the appellant. Shri Sanjay S. Agrawal, counsel for respondent No 3 Shri H.S.Patei with Shri Ali Asgar, counsel for respondent No.5. None appears for other respondents. ORAL ORDER (Passed on 7‘“ of March, 2908) Heard finallv. . 2. The only point that arises for consideration in this appeai is whether the compensation of Rs.5,000l— awarded by the Tribunal in a case of grievous injury sushined by a girl aged 3 years in the accident needs to be enhanced or not. 3. According to the claimant, Jogeshwari, aged 3 years, suffered fracture in the right hand and injury below the right ear in the accident She underwent operation of her right hand and was admitted in'the hospital from 03.05.2001 to 23.05.2001. No permanent disability was suffered by her. The Tribunal has awarded compensation of Rs.5,000l- only under the following heads: 4. Shri P.P.Sahu, learned counsel appearing for the appellant prayed that the compensation awarded by the Tribunal is very meager and should be enhanced suitably. 5. Shri Sanjay S. Agrawal, learned counsel appearing ior respondent No.3 and Shri H.S.Patel with Shri Ali Asgar, leamed counsel appearing for respondent No.5 argued in support" of the impugned award. 6. Having considered rival submissions and the facts and circumstances of the case, l am of the considered opinion that the compensation awarded by the Tribunal is niggardiy low. Considering/ /// A) Expenses in treatment Rs.2,000l- B) Cost of attendant Rs.1 ,OOOI- C) Pain and suffering Rs.2,000/— Total Rs.5.000l- the facis and circumstances of the case and the date of cccurrence; in my considered opinion, total compensation of Rs.15,0001- should have been awarded. 7. in the resuit, the appeai is aliowed. Compensation awarded by the Tribunal is enhanced from Rs.5,000/— to Rs.15,000/-. The compensation so enhanced by Rs.10,000/- shall be equally bome by respondents No.3 and 5. Sdl_ Dilip Raosaheb Deshmukh i i Judgg ,11 w .Gopal