•^^ .?€?.:"^ ^^- ^ '^ ^&.-v'"% 1 // HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR SB: Hon'ble Shri Justice R. L. Jhanwar, M.A.fC)No.440of2006 APPELLANT/Claimant : Ashok Kumar Versus RESPONDENTS : Madhulika and another. :""" r-.r.—•----.-• .. — -:-•• .-••,' ORDER For Pronouncement of Order t^ 01.2011 Sd/- R.L. Jhanwar Judge .% HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH : BILASPUR SINGLE BENCH: HON'BLE SHRI R.L.JHANWAR. J. Misc. Appeal (C) No.440 of 2006 APPELLANT Claimant RESPONDENTS Ashok Kumar S/o Babu Bhai Maniyar, aged about 36 years, r/o Tikarapar Dhamtari, Tahsil & Distt. Dhamtari (C.G.) VERSUS 1. Madhulika D/o Kaushal Prasad, aged about 23 years, r/o Rudri Irrigation Colony, Dhamtari, Dist. Dhamtari (C.G.) 2. The Oriental Insurance Co. Ltd. Near Adarsh Bal Mandir Dhamtari (C.G.) APPEAL UNDER SECTION 173 OF THE MOTOR VEHICLES ACT Appearance: Shri Sanjeev Banjare, counsel forthe appellant. Shri C.K.Sahu, counsel for respondent No.1. Shri SudhirAgrawal, counsel for respondent No.2. ORDER (Passedon 10.01.2011) This is claimant's appeal. Not being satisfied by the amount of compensation of Rs.39,0007- awarded by the Additional Mbtor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Dhamtari, Civil District Raipur in Claim case No.161/2004, the claimant preferred this instant appeal for enhancement of amount of compensation. 2. Brief facts, in a nutshell, are that on fateful day of 28.04.2003, the appellant was going on his cycle and at Church, respondent No.1, who was driving motor cycle bearing C.G. 05 A 1071 in a rash and negligent manner, dashed the appellant, as a result of which he received injuries on his right leg, thigh and also sustained fracture on his hip. 3. Seeking compensation of Rs. 14,50,0007- on various heads, the appellant filed a claim petition pleading that despite best treatment, he was not able to perform his duties; he was earning Rs.75/- per day by doing the job of looking after the cycle stand and was also earning Rs.3000/- by doing accounts work. ,,^!y%>'i /'^'"'%'•""%. ^sl^^. i. "'"'II l' '% ^••^.^'^ 'z 4. The respondents by filing their written statements denied the averments made in claim petition. 5. As against the compensation of Rs.14,50,000/- claimed by the claimant by filing claim petitionunder Section 166 of the Motor Accident for injuries sustained by the claimant in motor accident on 28.04.2003, the learned Tribunal, on close scrutiny of the submissions made, evidence led and material placed, held that due to rash and negligent driving of respondent No.1, the accident had taken place in which the appellant got serious injuries. The Tribunal accepted the medical bills, produced by the appellant, amounting to Rs.4,000/-. The Tribunal,taking into consideration that the appellant sustained 45% permanent disability, fixed his income at Rs.25,000/- towards loss of income for a period of threeyears. By adding Rs.10,000/- towards expenses incurred on attendant during hospitalization, pain and mental agony. In this manner,, the Tribunal worked out the total compensation as Rs.39,000/- for the injuries sustained by theappellant in the motor accident. 6. Learned counsel for the appellant argued that the Tribunal has erred in awarding meager amount of Rs.39,000/- as total compensation and it ought to have awarded higher amount towards compensation. 7. On the other hand, learned counsel appearing for the respondents argued in support ofthe impugned award. 8. I have heard the arguments advanced on behalf of parties and perused the impugnedorder including the record ofthe Tribunal. 9. Claimant Ashok Kumar was aged about 36 years on the date of the accident. Accprding to him, he used to earn.Rs.75/- per day by doing the job of cycle stand keeper and also used to earn Rs.3000/- per month by doing accounts work. But in support of the above evidence, no -documentary evidence to prove the same has been produced by him. I, therefore, do not find any fault in the approach of the Tribunal in discarding the evidence about the income of the deceased in the present case. However, it is clear from the pleadings of the appellant and evidenceon record that he got injuries in the motor accident and the injuries were of serious nature. It is also clear from the evidence that remain admitted in the Hospital w.e.f. 29.04.2003 till 19.05.2003 i.e. for a period of 20 days.' As the injuries sustained by the claimant in the motor •/ accident were of serious nature, it would not have been possible for him to attend for his duties during hospitalization and definitely he would have .(..^'" ;" -f' :l i.^ suffered pain and mental agony for the injuries sustained by him in the motor accident. 10. On due consideration of the submissions of learned counsel for the parties and all the relevant factors including the above mentioned broad features of the case, 1 am of the opinion that further award of Rs.11,000/- inclusive of interest component on the enhanced amount of compensation would make the compensation of Rs.39,000/- awarded by the Tribunal as just and proper compensation in the facts and circumatances of the present case. 11. Therefore, the appeal filed by the appellant for enhancement is allowed in part. The compensation of Rs.39,000/- awarded to the appellant by the Tribunal is enhanced by Rs.11,000/- inclusive of interest component on the enhanced amount of compensation, in addition to the sum of Rs.39,000/- awarded by the Tribunal. 12. The Oriental Insurance Company Limited / respondent No.2 is granted 3 months time to deposit the enhanced amount of compensation of Rs. 110OO/- with the concerned Claims Tribunal. No order as to costs. Sd/- R.L. Jhanwar Judge