HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR DIVISION BENCH CORAhfl: HON'BLE SHRI RAJEEV GUPTA, C.J. & HON'BLE SHRI RANGNATH CHANDRAKAR, J. Appellant Claimant Respondents Non-applicants Misc. Appeal No. 492 of 2006 Ramesh Chandra Vashisth, s/o. Shri Shiv Kumar Vashisth, occupation Business, r/o. Baikunthpur, Ward Baisagarpara, Tahsil Baikunthpur, Distt. Koriya, CG. VERSUS /1. United Insurance Company through Branch Manager, Branch Office, Ambikapur, Distt. Surguja, CG. (Insurer) 2. Brijlal Sahu, alias Babalu, s/o. Pramodi Sahu, aged about 25 years, occupation driver, (Driver) 3 Brijmohan Sahu, s/o. Pramodi Sahu, aged about 35 years. (Owner) Respondents No. 2 and 3 r/o. village Bhandhi, Police Station and Tahsil Baikunthpur, Distt. Koriya, C.G. WIISC.APPEAL UNDER SECTION 173 OF THE MOTOR VEHICLESACT.1988. 43resent: Shri Ashok Kumar Shukla and Shri Atanu Ghosh, learned counsel for the appellant. Shri H.B. Agrawal, learned Senior counsel with Smt. Meera Jaiswal, learned counsel for respondent No.1. None for respondents No. 2 and 3 though served. ORDER (19th April, 2011) The following order of the Court was passed by Rajeev Gupta, C.J. Appellant/ Claimant Ramesh Chandra Vashisth is seeking enhancement of the compensation awarded by the Additional Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Baikunthpur, district Korea (for short 'the Tribunal') vide award dated-31.01.2006, passed in Claim Case No.23/2002. 2) As against the compensation of Rs.42,18,000/- claimed by the appellant/ claimant by filing a claim petition under Section 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act for the injuries sustained by him in the motor accident on 09.12.2000, the Tribunal awarded a total sum of Rs.1,76,550/- as compensation along with interest @ 6% per annum from the date of filing of the claim petition till the date of actual payment. 3) Shri Ashok Kumar Shukla and Shri Atanu Ghosh, learned counsel for the appellant vehemently argued that the Tribunal has erred in awarding low compensation of Rs.1,76,550/- only, though th& appellant/ claimant sustained multiple serious injuries including fractures in the motor accident resulting in permanent disability to the extent of 50%. 4) Shri H.B. Agrawal, iearned Senior Counsel with Smt. Meera Jaiswal, learned counsel for respondent No.1 United India Insurance Company Limited, the insurer of the offending •ygys% J. ^y-y vehicle Jeep, on the other hand, supported the award and contended that the compensation of Rs.1,76,550/- awarded by the Tribunal is just and proper compensation in the facts and circumstances of the present case. 5) In a motor accident claim case, what is important is that, the compensation to be awarded by the Courts/Tribunals should be just and proper compensation in the facts and circumstances of the case. It should neither be. a meager amount of compensation, nor a Bonanza. 6) Now we shall examine as to whether the compensation of Rs.1,76.550/- awarded by the Tribunal is just and proper compensation in the facts and circumstances of the present case. 7) Claimant Ramesh Chandra Vashisth was aged about 46 years on the date of the accident. He was Proprietor of Mankameshwar Bangle Store, Baikuntpur. The disability certificate Ex.P/4 dated 19.02.2002 certified that the claimant suffered temporary disability to the extent of 30% on account of the fracture of his left femur bone. The second disability certificate dated 31.03.2005, however, mentioned the extent of disability at 50%. The second disability certificate, however, is silent about the nature of the disability that is whether it was temporary or permanent. 8) The compensation of Rs.1,76.550/- awarded by the Tribunal when examined in the context of the above mentioned ^^B8 •!'l...fe .tfit, 'l 1*' "s ,.;'• ^' broad features of the case, in our opinion, does not call for any enhancement in this appeal. 9) The appeal filed by the appellant/claimant for enhancement ofthe compensation, therefore, fails and is hereby dismissed. 10) No order as to costs. Sd/- Chief Jiistice l§na Chandrakar nimmi