IGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR awasgem m—‘m‘u CORAM: HON’BLE SHRE RAJEEV GUPTA, CJ. HON’BLE SHRI SUNIL KUMAR $INHA, J. Misc! Appeal Na. 103 cf 2003 Badriprasad aged 52 years, S/o Panch Ram Sahu, RIG Chhirra, Tah . Baloda Bazar, D%stt. Raipur VER$US Resxmndems Manager, M/s Ashok Transport, fw‘n agp'lcawta‘ Partner, Suresh Jain, New Bus \ 2. Mani Ram: aged 27 years; $/o Sewa Ram Dewangan, R/o Ravan Tah Baloda Bazar, Distt Raipur Bfanch Manager, The New india insurance Ca. Bhatapara Road, Baloda Bazar Distt Raipur pellant § meant i A 'AI‘ J I > Stand Baloda Bazar (Owner), Tan Baiada Bazar, Di$ttRaipur ()A W3C A?FEAL QNEFR SEbTiQN 17$ THE MO'KBR ‘iEHlCLES ACT 1983 #resent: Shri HV Shanna, counsel for the appellant. Shri Q. Aziz, counsel for respondent No.3. omen K (23rd eebruary, 2911) The following .order of the Court was passed by l l Rajeev Gupta r r l l Appellant/ claimant‘ Badriprasad is seeking enhancement of i the compensation awarded by the Second Additonai Motor H ~ OF ¢ x k Accident Claims Tribunal Baioda Bazar (for short ”the Tribunai’) \glde award dated 03 12 2002 pa$sed m Claim Case No 42J7001 2p As agalnst the compensahon of Rs 8 82 09% claimed by tfw‘e appellant/ daimant, by'fiiing a claim petition under Sgction 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act for the injuries sustained by him in the motor accident'on 12.G5.1999, the Tribunal awarded a total sum of 3.31 ,7431— as compensajrion along with interest @ 37% per annum l V ‘ d“ #r from the date of filing of the claim petition till the date of actual p‘avment 3;) the Tribunal on a close scrutiny of the entire evrdence led bl i i, unes in the motor aocrdent on 12 05 1999 the acoident occurred due to rash and negligent driving of the driver of the offending vehicle Dumber bearing registration No M926-D/8134' ae the ajbove otfendrno vehicle Dumper on the date of the accrdent was insured with the New lndia insurance Company Limited and the lhsurance Comoany comd not establien anv breach ct the oolicy onditlone the lnsurance Company was liable to pay compensation to the claimant. 4) As the respondents have not fiied any appeal against the award, the above findings recorded by the Tribunal have now attained finality.» 53) " 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 his a efore it held that claimant Badriprasad sustained muittpie serroue x l t?e&tment, aWarded Rs.12,443/— towards medical expenses; i ¥QEs.3,600f- towards cam/eyance; Rs.700!— towards special diet; §s.1,000/~ toWards attendant; Rs‘5,000/— towards pain and sluffemg: and Rs.9,000/- under ather heads. The T{ibunai, thusi warded a iota! sum of‘Rs.31,743i— as compensation to the ttaimant for the injuries sustained by him in the motor accident. he Tribunal further directed payment of interest on the above amount of compensation of Rs 31 743i— Q 7% per annum from the ate of riirng of the ciarm petition trii the date of actuai payment Shri HV Sharma, teamed counsei for the appeiiant t ompensation of Rs 31 743l- only though the appellant/ claimant uetained multiole serious tniuries rn the motor acoident T’) Shri Q. Aziz, learned counsel for respondent No.3 the New ‘ndla insurance Company Limited, on the other hand, supported the award and contended that as the claimant was in government service, the entire amount spent by ‘ntm on treatment must have been reimbursed bv the Government and that the olarmant himself admitted that even after the accident he is getting the same salary which he was getting prior to the accident. 8) Claimant Badriprasad was aged about 52 years on the date t f the accident At the relevant time, he was working as Assistant Develooment Extension Officer The claimant sustained multiple i [serious rnjunes rn the motor accident is established from the evroence of AW-4 Dr Y K Sharma True, most or the amount a l submitted that the Tribunal has erred ‘ in awarding low i l Q i i i i , spent on treatment must have been reimbur$ed by the Govemment I , Ts the claimant was in Goxiemment $ervice. ’ Nevertheiess, the i laimant mU$t have suffered mentaHy and physicany on account of anihe. e The compensation of Rs.31;743/- awarded by the Tribunai ie injuriee sustained by him in the motor accident atieast for 4-6 r Then examined in the ’contexi of the above—mentioned broad feéiures of the case; in our opinion, ie somewhat on the lower side and deserves to be enhanced to Some extent. 10) Considering aii the reievant aspects of the matter, we, are of the opinion that further award of Rs.11,DOOJ~ inclusive of intetest component on the enhanced amount of compensation woold make the comoensation of Rs.31,743l- awarded by the Tribunal as just and oroper compensation in the facts and ctrcumstances of the l ptesent case _ _ .. 1'1) The appea! filed by the appetiant/ claimant for enhancement of the compensation, therefore, is allowed in part. The ciaimant is awarded further sum of Rs.1 1 ,0001— inclusive of interest component on the enhanced amount of compensation in addition to the sum of R‘s.31 ,74'3f- awarded by the Tribunal. 12) Respondent No.3 the New India insurance Company Limited tsi granted three months’ time for depositing the totai sum of Rs1 1 ,DOO/- before the concerning Claims Tribunat. i .. E . 13) No order as to costs. Tm j Sd/- z ‘ CHIEF JUSTICE