ma (a) \3\0/o% HEGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR DIWSION BENCH Coram : H¢N’BLE $HRI RAJEEV GUPTA C J & HQN’BLE SHRI SUNEL KUMAR $INHA J Misc. Agbeai (Ci IPR} Ne.2129 of 2 Vishnu Prasad Rgthore: aged about 28 years, S/o Late Awadhram Rathore, R/o Farswani, Poke ChowkE, Urga, Thana and D ist’t’. Korba Hiersus APPELLANT CLNMANTS R§SPONDENTS 1. Keshav Singh Rajput aged about r - 41 years ole V damgh Rajijm, R/o La’nva Pohce Chowkt Akaltara Distt Janjgir Champa Managing Director Chhattisgarh indusma§ Deveiap‘nent Corporation Ltd near D KS Bhawan kachan Chcwk Ramdr through Aagay Manaaer CIDC ‘ Office m, Karba. ‘ Bihari Unadhyaay @ Raga Upadhyay, S/o Devmani Upadhyay, R/o Mam Road Korba ~C i. Upadhyav S/o S P Upad'way, RIG Gama Gain Kcrba United India in$urance Company itd Tnrough Dmsmnal Manager Dmswn Office ln front 0f Maharishi Vidhya Mandir, Mam Road, Korba ’ The State of ,Chhattisgarh, thmugh CoHector, Kama MSCELLANEous mapEAL UNDER SECT:ON 173 OF ‘ ' MOToR aEHmLEs ACT: 1983 Present Shri Anand Shukla learned counsei‘for the appeliant O R § E R (1?“ September, 2998) ‘ e @ The foliowing order of the Court was passed by Rajeev Gupta, C.J.: Shri Anand Shukla, learned counsel for the appeliant is heard on the application for condonation of delay. 2. On due ooneio‘eration‘, we are satisfied that the appeilant has succeeded in showing sufficient cause for the delay in fiiing the appeaL 3. The application for condonation of deiay, therefore, is aiiowed and the delay in filing the appeai is hereby condoned. 4. Shri Anand Shukia, ieamed counsei for the appeiiani is heard on admission ' 5. The appeiiant is seeking enhancement of the compensation av‘vard‘ed by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Korba (for short ‘ihe Tribunal) 'vide award dated 05.63.20Q8, passed in Claim Case No.276/2007. 6. ’As against the compensation of Rs.55;50,000f- claimed ‘oy the appellanifciaimani Vishnu Prasad Rathore by fiiing a ciaim peiiiion under Section 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act for the iniuries sustained by him in the motor accident on 2i.i€i.2001, the Tribunai awarded a total sum of Rs,2,45,.000i- as compensation aiong with interest @‘6% per annum from the date of fiiing of the claim petition ' ’ till the date of actual payment. ‘ 7, Learned counsel for the appellant vehemently amued thatthe compensation of Rs.2,45,009/’- awarded by the Tribunal is too low in ‘ comparison to the serious nature of the iniuries and fractures sustained b the claimant in the motor accident. ‘ 8. Appeiiantfciaimant ViShnu Prasad Rathore ciaimed compensgtéon of Rs.55;50,000f— by pieading that he used to earn Rs.5,.000/— per month from agricusture and on acoouniiof the injuries - and the fractures sustained by him in the meter accident resulting in' permanent disability to the extent of 30%, he hasmeen rendered unfit to pursue his occupation as an Agricdtturist. Q, The Tribunal awarded a sum of Rs.18,0GO/- tewards toss of income for a period of about 6 months; RsA ,83,6OD/- on account of ’ iose or“ future earning capacity resuiting from 30% permanent ' disability; Rs,15,000/- for pain and suffering, Rs‘15,206f- towards / medicai exeenses; Rs.1t,759f- for special diet etc; and Rs.t,200/- stewards conveyance charges The Tribunal we are satisfied has 1 awarded compensation under aft the permissible heads 10 On due conSIderatron of the submisscons of the learned : counsel for the apoellant and the reasonings given by the Tribunal in the Impugned award and consrdenng that the appeliant sustained " permanent disability to the extent of 30% only, we donot find any scope for enhancement of the compensation awarded by the» ' Tribunai. 11: ' The appeal filed by the ciatmant for enhangement of " compensation, therefore, is liable to be dismissed and is hereby I dismissed summarily. Sci/- SUNIL KUMAR smrtA{{# ~ Judge ‘ a V '