r -^"^^&il.a^nB^^n^-LiJaSl IN THE HON'BLE HIGHCOURT OFCHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR M.A.(C)No.- ^4> /2009 lgaai.3 'uui^" APPELLANT THE ORIENTAL INSURANCE COMPANY LIMITED, THROUGH BRANCH MANAGER, AMBIKAPUR, SARGUJA (C.G.) Vrs. RESPONDENTS/CLAIMANTS :- •s. - -^.-^ '^ 8fi..- Cl ...••••""l- -e.l-0^"".'*^..-* ^.v*-" ,<-a''~3 •^- 'i "'^^(ai-"". .^ ....^li^ ^ SMT. JYOTI W/0 SURESH MANIKPURI , AGE 24 YRS., RESIDENT 0V PANDOPARA, THANA - PATNA, TAHSIL - BAIKUNTHPUR, DISTRICT - KOREA V:.' (C.G.) RESPONDENTS/NON-APPLICANTS :- 1^_ 2. HIMALAY KUMAR S/ORAMJIT RAM, AGE 23 YRS:, RESIDENT OF GOVINDPUR, THANA - SURAJPUR, DISTRICT - SARGUJA (C.G.) ^~ 3. RAMKUMAR S/0 GENDURAM AGE 50 YRS. RESIDENT OF NORTH JHAGDAKHAND, TAHSIL MANENDRAGARH, DISTRICT - KOREA (C.G.) APPEAL UNDER SECTION 173 OF MOTOR VEHICLE ACT 1988 APPEAL VALUED Rs. 1,15,000/- (APPEAL BY INSURANCE) COMPENSATION CLAIMED BEFORE TRIBUNAL Rs. 4,30,000/- AWARDED AMOUNT BY TRIBUNAL Rs. 1,15,000/- . ^y- HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR APPELLANT MISC. APPEAL (Q No. 246 of20Q9 The Oriental Company Limited. Insurance Versus RESPONDENTS NON-CLAIMANTS Smt. Jyoti and two others. APPEAL UNDER SECTION 173 OF THE MOTOR VEHICLES ACT.1988 SB:- Hon. Shri N.K. Agarwal, J PRESMtT :- Shri Sudhir Agrawal with Shri P. Dutta, counsel for the appellant. Ms. Sofia Khan, counsel for respondent No.l Smt. Usha Chandrakar, counsel for respondents No.2 and3. ORAL AWARD (14.11.2011) 1. This is insurer's appeal against the award dated 10.12.2008 passed by the 2nd Additional Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal (F.T.C.), Manendragarh in Claim Case No. 14/2008. ' 2. As against the compensation of Rs.4,30,000/- claimed by the claimant by filing application under Section 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 (for short 'the Acf) for the injuries sustained by her in the accident on 24.04.2007, the Tribunal has awarded a total sum of Rs.1,15,000/- as compensation along with interest at 6% per annum from the date of application tiU its actual payment. •""T^mrara. ;-. — ...-—.^^^^iSf^^i^^SS^S^; ^;1-"-——-—=- sg^^ /.^.^ n f±ssf" 'aififfe i 'wigES'. 1? ^:,...^-^ 3. The Tribunal, on a close scrutiny of the evidence led, held: fhe accident had occurred due to rash and negligent driving ofBolero Jeep bearing registration No. C.G.16 B/0656 by its driver Himalay Kumar; appellant - Smt. Jyoti has sustained injuries in the said accident; appellant/the Oriental Insurance Company Limited liable for payment of compensation as it could not establish violation of policy conditions; assessed and awarded the aforesaid amount of compensation along with interest at 6% per annuin from the date of application till its actual payment. 4. Shri Sudhir Agrawal with Shri P. Dutta, learned counsel appearing for the appellant would submit: the Tribunal has erred in awarding Rs.30,000/- on the head of pain and suffering; in awarding Rs.1,15,000/- as total compensation in a case where no doctor was examined by the claimant to establish number and nature of injuries and the resultant loss. 5. On the other hand, Ms. Sofia Khan and Smt. Usha Chandrakar, leamed counsel appearing for respondents whfle supporting the award unpugned would submit: the Tribunal, while awarding compensation towards medical expenses incurred by the claimant, escaped consideration of several bills produced and proved by the claimant and thus has erred in awarding low amount of compensation on the above head, "%--7?'.——---—^-.-_ 9C 9K -^ -^^ .~^;'1u'r-'1 ;;^^^. "i»s.. y'-^' and therefore, the award impugned does not call for any interference. 6. I have heard leamed counsel for the parties and perused the award impugned including the record of the Tribunal. fy... 7. The claimant sustained injuries including fracture on scalp and nasal bones. Admittedly, no doctor was examined by the appellant to establish the number and nature of the injuries said to have been sustained by the appellant/claimant in the motor accident and the fact that those injuries resulted in any permanent disability. The Tribunal awarded Rs.70,000/- on the head of medical expenses, Rs.15,000/- towards attendant, conveyance and special diet and Rs.30,000/- towards pain and suffering and loss of income thus awarded Rs.1,15,000/- as compensation along with interest @ 6% per annum from the date of application till its actual payment. 8. The amount of Rs.30,000/- awarded by the Tribunal towards pain and suffering and loss of income and Rs.15,000/- towards attendant, conveyance and special diet appears to be on higher side looking to the fact that no doctor has been exainined by the claimant to prove number '"•^A ''•^: ^ -:ry- and nature of injuries and the resultant loss suffered which deserve to be suitably reduced. 9. When the matter is examined in the context of above broad features of the case, in my opinion, reduction of Rs.15,000/- from the amount of compensation of Rs.1,15,000/- awarded by the Tribunal, would make the amount of compensation as just and proper compensation. 10. For fhe foregoing, the appeal is allowed in part. The amount of compensation of Rs.1,15,000/- awarded by the Tribunal is reduced by Rs.15,000/-. The respondent No.l/claimant is entitled to get Rs.1,00,000/- in place of Rs.1,15,000/-. The award is modified to the above extent. Rest of the conditions of the award shall remain intact. 11. No order as to costs. Sd/- N.K. Agra' Judge