>^ •ftl ''oJ^i V'BL .i?QS 57 of 2011 Claimant Ramesh Kumar Ni Tiharuram Nirmalkar, aged about 35 years, r/o Abhanpur, Thana Abhanpur, District Raipur CG Siyaram Seuk @ Salim about 52 years, r/o RES Colony, Kanker, Thana Kanker, District Kanker CG (Driver of the vehicle Indica Car -190/0180) •„., • ~'»t Insurance Company Limited, Raipur, District Raipur CG (Insurer of the vehicle indica Car bearing regd No.CG- 19 C /0180) Validity date 14/01/2008 to 15/01/2009 Vikas Upadhyay, s/o MS Upadhyay, r/'o Jaishri Bags Stores, Bus Stand Kanker, Distrsct Kanker CG (Ovi/ner of the vehicle Indica Car bearing regd No.CG- 19C/0180) Present : Shri Satyendra Sahu and Shri Suresh Tandon, counse! for the appeltant. Shri Sudhir Agrawal and Shri P Dutta, counsel for respondent No.2. MACNo. 867 of 2010 ith The foilowina order of the Court was passed f* Lp \^c^S Appellant / Ciaimant Ramesh Kumar Mirmaikar is seeking ith enhancement of the compensation awarded by the 9'" Additional Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Raipur (for short 'the Tribunal') vide award dated 06.04.2009, passed in Claim Case No.91/2008. 2) As against the compensation of Rs.29,10,000/-, claimed by the appelianVclaimant, by fiiing a claim petition under Section 166 of the IVIotor Vehicles Act, for the injuries sustained by him in th< motor accident on 24.03.2008, the Tribunal awarded a tota! sum of Rs.20,114/- as compensation along with interest @ 7.5% per annum from the date of filing of the claim petition till the date actuai payment. 3) The Tribunai on a ciose scrutiny of the entire evidence led before it held the Orientat insurance Company Limited, the insurer of the offendin.Q vehicie Indica Car bearing reflistration No.CG 19 C /0180 liable to pay the compensation to the ciaimant. 4) As the insurer of She above offending vehicle Indica Car has not filed any appeal challenging the above finding recorded by the Tribunal, the same now 'nas attained finality. 5) The Tribunal considering the number and nature of the injuries proved to have been sustained by the ciaimant in the motor accident and the amount proved to have been spent on treatment, awarded Rs.13,114/- towards medical expenses; Rs.5,000?- for ;" —.«»».aR .^a MACNo.867 of 2010 2^ pain and suffering; and Rs.2,000/- for special diet. The Tribuna!, thus, awarded a total sum of Rs.20.114/- as compensation to the claimant for the injuries sustained by him in the motor accident. The Tr ll f arnount of compensation of Rs.20,114/- @ 7.5% per annum from the date of filing of the ciaim petition till the date of actual payment. 6) Shri Satyendra Sahu 'and Shri Suresh Tandon, learned counsei Tor the appellant submitted that the Tribunal has erred in not awarding low compensation of Rs.20,114/- only though the appeitant/claimant sustained multiple serious injuries includinc fracture in the motor accident. 7) Shri Sudhir Agrawa! and Shri P Dutta, learned counsel for respondent No.2 the Ori insurer of the offending supported the awarded and contended that t'ne compensation of ih.icle conte Limited, t'ne Car on the other hand Rs.20,114/- awarded by the Tri compensation in the facts and circun is c-asf 8) Ciaimant Ramesh Kumar Nirmalkar was aged about 35 ^ years OR the date of the accident. He was a Washer-man by occupation. T'ne claimant sustained multiple serious injuries including fracture of hls left Femur bone in the motor accident is borne out from the evidence avaiiable on record. It is a matter of is requirea to De on the treatment of fracture. The c'aimant must have remained bedridden for a period of at least 2-3 months on accoun.t of fracture of his ieft Femur bone and must haye suffered monitory loss. •'V^-^^v;..'.r.,\^.iS-^;[a;SS- MACNo.887 of 2010 9) The Tribunal certainly has erred in not av/arding any sum towards loss of income during the period of treatment. 10) The compensation of Rs.20,114/- awarded by the Tribunai, when examined in the context of the above mentioned broad features of the case, in our opinion, is too iow and deserves to be enhanced suitably. 11) Considering ali the relevanl aspects of the matter, we are of the opinion that further award of Rs.25,000/- inclusive of interest component on the enhanced amount of compensation would make the compensation of Rs.20,114/- awarded by the Tribunal as just and proper compensation in the facts and circumstances of the 12) The appeal filed by the appeilant/ciaimant for enhancement of the compensation, therefore, is allowed in part. The claimant is awarded further sum of Rs.25,000/- inclusive of interest component on the enhanced amount of compensation in addition to the sum of Rs.20,114/- aAwarded by the Tribunal. 13) Respondent No.2 the Orienta! insurance Company is granted three months' time for depositing the total sum of Rs.25,0007- before the concerning Claims Tribunal. 14) Mo order as to costs. Sd/- Chief Justice Sd/- R.N. Chandrakar Judge padma