OF CHHATTISGARK AT BILA^sPUR SB: Hon'ble Shri Justice R. L. Jhan-wan MA (C)No. 978 of 2010 APPELLANT Cjajmant RESPQNDENTS Chetan Lal Dewangan Versus Ashok Kumar and others ORD_E.R For Pronouncement of Order .04.2011 Sd/- R.L. Jhanwar Judge li6 .v-f.^.vr i HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH : BILASPUR SINGLE BENCH: HON'BLE SHRI R.LJHANWAR. J. IVIisc. Appeal f0 No. 978 of 2010 APPELLANT CLAIMANT Chetan Lat Deyyangan Son of Mitthu Dewangan, aged about 55 years, R/o Occupation Halwai, R/o Sewata Para, Dongergaon, District Rajnandgaon (C.G.) VERSUS RESPONDENTS NON-APPLICANTS 1. Ashok Kumar S/o Mehattar Sinha, aged about 37 years, R/o Mathpara, Ward No. 37, Rajnandgaon, Distt. Rajnandgaon (C.G.) | (Driver) 2. Gurjit Singh, S/o Sardar Amrik Singh, R/o Jai Stambh Chowk, Rajnandgaon, District Rajnandgaon (C.G.) (Owner) 3. National Insurance Co. Ltd., Through Branch Manager, Branch Office, Kamthi Line, Rajnandgaon (C.G.) APPEAL UNDERSECT10N 173 OF THE IVIOTOR VEHICLES ACT.1988 Appearance: Shri V.K.Sharma, counsel for the appellants. Mrs. Shashi Bareth, counsel for respondents No.1 & 2. Mr. G.V.K.Rao, counsel for respondent No.3 QRDER (Passedon jg.04.2011) Appeifant Chetan La! Dewangan is seeking enhancement of compensation awarded by the 1st Additional Motor Accidents Ciaims Tribunal, Rajnandgaon (in short (the TribunaS1) in daim caseNo. 154/2008 vide award dated 25.02.2010. 2. As against the compensation of Rs.3,26,000/- ciaimed by the appeiianVclaimant by fiiing a ciaim petition under Section 166 of the Motor Vehides Act for the injuries sustairied by him in the motor accident on 4.8.2008, the Tribuna! awarded a tota! sum' of Rs.88,800/- as .<, compensation to the claimant along with interest at 6% per annum from the date offiling ofthe claim petition till the date of actual payment 3. The Tribunal on a close scrutiny of the entire evidence led before it held that claimant Chetan La! Dewangan sustained multiple InjurEes in the motor accident on 4.8.2008; the accident occurred due to rash and negligent driving of driver of offending vehicle i.e. bus bearing registration No. C.G. 07 E 0127 and as the offending bus was insured with the National Insurance Company Limited, the insurance company was a!so liabie to pay compensation to the cIaEmant. 4. As the respondents have not filedany appeai against the impugned order.the above findings recorded by the Tribunal have now attained finality. 5. The Tribunal considering the number and nature of theinjuries proved to have been sustained by the appellant in the motor accident and the amount proved to have been spent on his treatment, awarded Rs.10.000/- towards expenses incurred in treatment, special diet and conveyance charges, Rs.20,000/- towards pain and suffering, Rs.9,000/- towards loss of earning in the course of treatment, Rs.19,800/- towards loss of income on account of permanent disability and Rs.30,.000/- towards non-pecuniary loss on account of permanent disability. The Tribunal, thus, awarded a total sum ofRs.88,800/- as compensation to the ciaimant. The Tribunal further directed payment of interest on the above amount of compensation of Rs.88,800/- at 6% per annum from the date of the filing of claim petition till the date of actua! payment. 6. Shri V.K.Sharma, learned counsel for theappellaht submitted that the Tribunal, taking into consideration the permanent disability to the extent of 30% and the appellant was earning Rs.3000/- per month, has erred in assessing loss of earning at Rs.150/- per month and Rs.1800/- per annum whereas the total loss of'earning should be at Rs.1,18,800/- if the Tribunal ought to have assessed the loss of earning at Rs.900/- instead of Rs.150/-, and Rs.10,800/- as annual !oss of earning. ^'^SE''''^' -4. ^- 7. On the other hand, Shri G.V.K.Rao, learned counsel for respondent No.3 submitted that the learned Tribunal has rightly awarded Rs.88,800/- as total compensation and no leniency shouldbe shown in enhancing the amount of compensation because the learned Tribunal has already awarded Rs.20,000/- under the head pain and suffering and again Rs.30,000/- under th6 head non-pecuniary loss on account of permanent disablement, which is on higher side whereas it should at Rs.20,000/-. 8 . Having heard rival submissions, I have perused the record of the Tribunal including its impugned award. The Tribunal, on close scrutiny of the evidence led before it, held that although the appeflant could not produce any certificate to show his exact income but his income should not be less than Rs.3000/- which amount an un-skilled labour is earning. Accordingly, the Tribunal assessed monthly income of the appeilant as Rs.3,000/-. The approach of the TribunaE inassessing monthly income of the appellant is proper. However,the Tribunal, considering the permanent disability to the extent of 30% suffered by the appeltant, has fallen into error in taking Rs.150/- as his loss of eaming; in awarding Rs.19,800/- towards loss of earning on account of permanent disability of 30%. The Tribunal aiso awarded Rs.30,000/- towards non-pecuniary loss on account of permanent disability and Rs.20,000/- towards pain and suffering. The non-pecuniary loss would mean that itcannot be calculated by money, 9. Claimant Chetan Lal Dewangan was aged 55 years on the date of accident. He used to earn his livelihood by doing labour work in a hotet. Due to injuries sustained by him in the motor acddent, he remained admitted in Government hospital, Rajnandgaon and during course of treatment he must have spent amount substantially on his treatment and as a result of injuries, he suffered 30% permanent disability on his left hand.as is evident from Ex.P.S.a certificate issued bythe Medical Board, Rajnandgaon and this was alsoproved by A.W.2 Dr. Anil Mahakalkar affirming the permanent disability suffered by the appellant. 10. On due consideration of the submissibns of the learned counsel for the parties and ali the relevant factors including the above mentioned broad features of the case, 1 am of the opinion that further award of B ,/fy\ .^y' '^^&^^ 4 ••^..^ Rs.61,000/- inclusive of interest component on the enhanced amount of compensation would make the compensation of Rs.88,800/- awarded by the Tribunal as just and proper compensation in the facts and circumstances of the present case. ^y1(. The appeal filed by the appellant/claimant for enhancement of the compensation, therefore, is allowedpartly. The appellant/claimant is awarded further sum of Rs.61,000/- inclusive of interest component on the enhanced amount of compensation, in addition to the sum of Rs.88,800/- awarded bytheTribunal. V- 13» Respondent No.3 - National insurance Co. Ltd. Js granted 3 months' time for depositing the sum of Rs.61,000/- before the concerning Claims Tribunai. No order as to costs. R.L. Jhanwar Judge