HIGH COURT‘OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR DIVISION BEN a isc Appeal No. 1184 of 200 M 5 Resg‘ ondents‘ 1 1 F \ Manoj Kumar Dewangan, s/o late Tejnath Dewangan, aged about 30 years, r/o College Road, Dongargaon ' Distt Rajnandgaon (Chhattisgarh) VERSUS Ramchand Gupta, s/o Chunniial Gupta, aged about 39 years, r/o Empire Lane 15/347, Potatukur 24 Pargana, Calcutta (N) 2 Shrimati Seema Gopal AgrawaL r/o Vardhman Nagar, Nagpur, Maharashtra .- 3 National Insurance Company Limited through' Divisional Officer, Division office, Aakash Ganga Parisar, Supela, Bhilai, Distt Durg (CG) Miscellaneous appeal under Section 173 of the Motor Vehicles Act The following ‘order of the Court was passed by Rajeev Gupta, C.J. l Present : Shri Abhishek Sharma, counsel forthe appellant. Shri BN Nande, counsel for respondent No.3. ORDER (25* July, 2011) CH p § Appellant! Claimant Manoj Kumar Dewangan is seeking enhancement of the compensation awarded by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Rajnandgaon (for shod ‘the Tribunal’) vide'award dated 13.05.2005, passed in Claim Case No.06/2001. l .2) As against the compensation of Rs 25 89 500/- 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 24.12.1999, the Tribunal awarded a total sum of Rs.1,60,000/- as compensation along with interest @ 6% per annum" from the ‘date of filing of the claim petition till the date of actual payment. 3) The Tribunal on a close scrutiny of the entire evidence led before it held the National Insurance Company Limited, the insurer of‘ the offending vehicle Truck—Trailor bearing registration No.MH-31NV-5960 liable to pay the compensation to the claimant. 4)§ As the insurer of the offending vehicle Truck Trailor has not fled any appeal challenging the above finding recorded by the Tribunal, the same,now has attained fnality. 5)i The Tribunal considering the number and nature of the injuries proved to have been sustained by the claimant in the motor accident; and the amount proved to have been spent on treatment, awarded Rs.1,43,600/- towards medical expenses; Rs.6,300/— for pain and suffering, Rs 10 ODOI- for loss of income during the period oftreatment The Tribunal thus assessedthetotal compensation payable to the claimant at Rs.1,59,900/-, which appears to have. been rounded off to Rs.1 ,60,000l—. The Tribunal, thus, awarded a lj l/ 7 v.w4._rm. Mr 7W»..«m.; 7.Nr,.~ (M.,M¢mm¢._.vm . w i ‘ totia! sum of Rs.1 ,60,000/- as compensation to the claimant for the injLries sustained by him in the motor accident. The Tribunal further directed payment of interest on the above amount of compensation of Rs.1 ,_60,000/— @ 6% per annum from the date of fiii g of the claim petition till the date of actual payment. 6) Shri Abhishek Sharma, learned counsel for the appellant sLr’bmitted that the Tribunal has erred in awarding only Rs.10,000/— towfards loss of income during the period of treatment; in not aWarding any sum towards attendant, special diet and conveyance; and in‘awarding low compensation of Rs.1 ,60,000/- only. 7)§ Shri B.N. Nande, learned counsel for respondent No.3 the National Insurance Company Limited, the insurer of the offending vehicle Truck-Trailer, on the other hand contended that the cdmpensation of Rs.1 ,60,000/— awarded by the Tribunal cannot be termed as in adequate so as to Warrant enhancement in this appeaL 8)‘ Claimant Manoj Kumar Dewangan was aged about 30 years on the date of the accident. He was a tailor by occupation. The claimant sustained multiple serious and crush injuries in the motor accident is established from the evidence of AW3 Dr. S Mahadev lyer, AW/4 Dr Uday Kumar, AW/5 Dr.VS Baghel. lt is also borne out from the evidence on record that the claimant remained under treatment for sufficiently long period. During the period of treatment, the claimant suffered monitory loss also because he could not have performed his duties as tailor.‘- Considering the period of treatment, the sum of Rs.10,000/— awarded by the l T‘ribunal towards loss of income is certainly too low. The Tribunal has also erred in not awarding any sum towards special diet, conveyance, and attendant 9) In our considered opinion, further award of Rs.40,000/- i clusive of interest component on the enhanced amount of compensation would make. the compensation of Rs.1,60,000/- awarded by the Tribunai as just and proper compensation in the facts-and circumstances of the present case. i 16) The appeal filed by the appellant/claimant for enhancement of the‘compensation, therefore, is allowed in part. The claimant is aWarded further sum of Rs.40,000/— inclusive ofinterest component on the enhanced amount of compensation in addition to the sum of Rés.1 ,60,000/- awarded by the Tribunal. 1i) Respondent No.3 the National insurance Company Limited is granted three months’ time for depositing the total sum of Rs.40,000!— before the concerning Claims Tribunal. l .w V / 1é2) No order as to costs. / . sd/_ /"?i/- Agarwa‘ ‘ Chief Jusacei l N‘ K. 1 Judge