c^ -w IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BILASPUR fC.G. Oi '^ M.A. (C) I ) /2009 aangas i'^1' 'irf S3 3^ : APPELLANT : Claimant ^- Smt. Meenabai Sahu W/o Shratudhan Sahu, Aged about 52 Years, R/o village r^.^''r •<[VJ. Tivaraiya, Post Dharsiwa, Tahsil and (...'•*'- ....•:^"'"c>-"^.. »..rf>""^" •,y'..--"""- , ttt"'': . i.<-a-'"~ ^^f^ ^ l.'>^) r^*T^...^-r"/ RESPONDENTS NON-CLAIMANTS District Raiipur (C.C.) VERSUS 1. Panchanand Ram S/o Vasudeo Ram, Occupation Truck Driver, R/o New Pandey Goods Carrier Bhanpuri, Raipur, Tahsil and District RaipurfC.G.) 2. Kshama Shankar Pandey S/o Purushottam, Occupation Owner of Vehicle R/o New Pandey Goods Carrier Bhanpuri, Tahsil and District Raipur (C.G.) 3. The Oriental Insurance Company Limited, Through : Divisional Manager, Address : Divisional Office, Kutchery Chowk, Jail Road, Raipur, Tahsil & District Raipur (CG) Miscellanceous Appeal under Section 1 73 of the MotorVehicleAct, 1994 HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR ^) Misc- Apoeal IC\ No 93 OF 2009 APPELLANT KESFQNDENTS Smt. Meenabai Sahu Versus l-'anctianand Kam anct others. MISCELLANEOUS APPEAL UNDER SECTION 173 OF THE WIOTOR VEHICLEACT.1988 (SB: Hon'ble Wlr. N.K. Aaarwal, J.) dlBWtn] Present : Mr. A.L. Singroyl, counsel for the appellant. Mr. Sudhir Agrawal and Mr. P. Dutta, counsel for respondent No.3. 1. Q^&.. I13.1^.ZUTI) Being aggrieved and dissatisfied with the amount of compensation awarcled by 11th Additional Motor Accident Claims Tribunal (F.T.C.), Raipur (for short 'the Tribunal') in Claim Case No.5/2008 vide award dated 25.10.2008, instant appeal has been filed by the appellant/claimant for enhancement of compensation. As against the compensatlon of Rs.4,50,000/- claimed by the appellant/claimant by filing claim petition under Section 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act for the injuries sustained by her in the motor accident on 25.6.2007; the Tribunal awarded a total sum of Rs.27,000/- along with interest @ 6 % per annum from the date of filing of claim petition till its actual payment. The Tribunal, on a close scrutiny of the evidence led, held : the accident had occurred due to rash and negligent driving of truck bearing registration No.CG-04/J/2668 by its driver i.e. respondent No. 1; the appellant/claimant sustained injuries in the said accident includinq fracture in the left hand: the respondent No.S/lnsurance Company liable for payment of compensation as it could not establish the violation of policy conditions; assessed and awarded aforesaid sum as comoensation to the appellant/claimant. v ^"--'a^. ^:^'-.-> -&, 1?' 4. Shri A.L. Singroul, learned counsel appearing for the appellant/claimant contended that the Tribunal has not awarded any sum towards attendantand loss of income during treatment and thus the Tribunal has fallen in error in awarding low amount of compensation of Rs.27,000/- only. 5. On the other hand, Shri Sudhir Agrawal and Shri P.Dutta, learned counsel appearing for the respondent No. 3/the Orientat Insurance Company Limited supported the award and submitted that in the facts & circumstances of the case, the amount awarded by the Tribunal is just and proper compensation. 6. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the material available on record. 7. The facts that the appetlant/claimant sustained iniuries including fracture in the left hand in the motor accident on 25.6.2007 and the Insurance Company failed to establish the violation of policy conditions are now not in dispute. 8. The appellant/claimant examined Dr. G.S. Bachhu. Admitted!y, Dr. Bachhu was not treating doctor. As per discharge summary (Ex.P-20), the appellant/claimant sustained fracture of left radious bone and was hospitalized for two days. It is also a matter of common knowledae in fracture a considerable amount of money is required for treatment. Appellant/claimant was aged about 52 vears at the time of accident, she must have bad ridden for a period of at least two months and in that period she could not have earned her livelihood. Besides above, the claimant must have spent some amount towards attendant for which the Tribunal has not awarded anv sum. 9. When the matter is examined in the context of above broad features of the case, in the considered opinion of this Court, further award ofRs.10,000/- would make the amount of compensation as just and proper compensation in the facts and circumstances of the present case. 10. For the foregoina reasons; the appeat filed by the appellant for enhancement of compensation is allowed in part. The compensation of Rs.27,000/- awarded by the Tribunal is enhanced to Rs.37,000/-. The appellant/claimant Is further entitled to receive Rs. 10,000/- over and above the amount awarded by the Tribunal. Enhanced amount of Rs.10,000/- shall carry interest @ 6% per annum from the date of filingof claim petition till its actual paymente. Award is modified to the above extent. Rest of the conditions mentioned in the award shatt remain intact. 11. The respondent No. 3/0riental Insurance Company Limited is aranted three months time to deposit enhanced amount of compensation of Rs. 10,000/- along with interest @ 6 % per annum from the date of filing of claim petition before the concernina Claims Tribunal. 12. No order as to costs. Sd/- N.K. Agrawal Judge ..—U.-.UL^^^.