••'^-.."^ ^••^ <\\ ^ ^ HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR DIVISION BENCH CORAM: HON'BLE SHRI RAJEEV GUPTA, C.J. & HON'BLE SHRI N.K. AGARWAL, J. Appellants Claimants Misc. Appeal (C) No. 355 of 2007 1. Smt. Vinodini Patro, w/o Rudra Charan Patro, aged about 40 years, profession Tailoring. 2. Rudracharan Patro, d/o Shyam Sunder Patro, aged about 45 years, profession tailoring. 3. Ku. Alka Patro, d/o Rudra Charan Patro, aged about 18 years, profession stitching and teaching. Present address : All resident of Rathraguda Para, Jagdalpur, district Bastar, C.G. Permanent Address: Village Purnagar (Jaipur), district Koraput, Orissa. VERSUS 1 Jivan Kumar Dey @ Jivan Krishna, s/o Nirmal Chand, aged about 24 years, r/o behind weather department Kumharpara, thana Kotwali, Jagdalpur, district Bastar C.G. 2 Oriental Insurance Company Limited through the Branch Manager, Branch < Office Main Road, Sadar Ward, Jagdalpur, district Bastar C.G. \ •.' Memo ofappeal underSection 173 ofthe MotorVehicIes Act. Respondents Non-applicants Present: Shri Alok Dewangan, counsel for the appellants. Misc. Appeal (C) No.355/2007 t^ Shri Sudhir Agrawal and Shri P. Dutta, counsel for respondent No.2. •< t; ORDER (29th July, 2011) The following order of the Court was passed by Rajeev Gupta, C.J. Appellants/claimants Smt. Vinodini Patro, Rudracharan Patro and Ku. Alka Patro are seeking enhancement of the compensation awarded by the Third Additional Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Jagdalpur (for short 'the Tribunal') vide award dated 05.07.2006, passed in Claim Case No.81/2005. 2) As against the compensation of Rs.3,43,000/- claimed by the appellants/claimants by filing a claim petition under Section 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act for the injuries sustained by them in the motor accident on 25.04.2004, the Tribunal awarded a total compensation of Rs.2,500/- each to the three claimants along with interest @ 6% per annum from the date of filing of the claim petition till the date of actual payment. 3) Shri Alok Dewangan, learned counsel foi- the appellants vehemently argued that the Tribunal has erred in awarding low compensation of Rs.2,500/- each to the claimants though appellant No.1 Smt. Vinodini Patro sustained multiple serious injuries including fracture in the motor accident resulting in permanent disability to the ;\, extentof25%. 4) Shri Sudhir Agrawal and Shri P. Dutta, learned counsel for respondent No.2 the Oriental Insurance Company Limited, on the :^ Misc. Appeal (C) No.355/2007 ^ other hand, contended that the Tribunal has erred in holding the insurer of the offending vehicle Commander Jeep liable to pay compensation to the claimants as the Commander Jeep though was insured as Private Car was being used as Taxi for carrying fare paying passengers. 5) It is true that claimant N6'.1 Smt. Vinodini Patro in her statement before the Tribunal categorically admitted that there were as many as 12-15 passengers in the said jeep and they had paid Rs.20/- each as fare for their journey to the driver of the Jeep. In such factual scenario, breach of the policy conditions is writ large. 6) Be that as it may, as the insurer of the offending. vehicle has not challenged the finding recorded by the Tribunal holding the insurerliable to pay compensation to the claimants, we do not deem jt neeessary to consider the above aspect of the matter any more. 7) Considering the number and nature of the injuries found to have been sustained by the claimants in the motor accident and the bills and vouchers produced by the claimants about the medical expenses, we are satisfied that the compensation of Rs.2,500/- each awarded by the Tribunal to the three claimants is just and proper compensation and does not call for any enhancement in this appeal. 8) As we do not find any scope for enhancement of the compensation awarded by the Tribunal, the appeal filed by the appellants/ claimants for-enhancement of the compensation is liable \ to be dismissed and is hereby dismissed. 9) No order as to cbsts, Sd/- Chief Justice Sd/- N.K. Agarwal Judge ^